Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 69/Friday, April 10, 2015/Rules And

19454 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DC. The Public Reading Room is open J. Relationship with other rules AGENCY from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday K. Timing of final rule through Friday, excluding legal L. Other comments 40 CFR Part 82 holidays. The telephone number for the VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory [EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0748; FRL–9922–26– Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, Planning and Review and Executive OAR] and the telephone number for the Air Order 13563: Improving Regulation and and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. Regulatory Review RIN 2060–AS04 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: B. Paperwork Reduction Act Margaret Sheppard, Stratospheric C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Listing of Substitutes for Refrigeration Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Mail Code E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism and Air Conditioning and Revision of F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation the Venting Prohibition for Certain 6205T, Environmental Protection and Coordination with Indian Tribal Refrigerant Substitutes Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue Governments NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of AGENCY: Environmental Protection number (202) 343–9163; fax number Children from Environmental Health and Agency (EPA). (202) 343–2338, email address: Safety Risks ACTION: Final rule. [email protected]. Notices H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that and rulemakings under EPA’s Significantly Affect Energy Supply, SUMMARY: Pursuant to the U.S. Significant New Alternatives Policy Distribution, or Use I. National Technology Transfer and Environmental Protection Agency’s (SNAP) program are available on EPA’s (EPA) Significant New Alternatives Advancement Act Stratospheric Ozone Web site at J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions Policy program, this action lists five www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/regs. flammable refrigerants as acceptable to Address Environmental Justice in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Minority Populations and Low-Income substitutes, subject to use conditions, in Population several end-uses: Household Table of Contents K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) refrigerators and freezers, stand-alone I. General Information VIII. References retail food refrigeration equipment, very A. Executive summary low temperature refrigeration, non- B. Background I. General Information mechanical heat transfer, vending C. Does this action apply to me? A. Executive Summary machines, and room air conditioning D. What acronyms and abbreviations are Pursuant to the SNAP program under units. This action also exempts from used in the preamble? II. How does the SNAP program work? Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 612, this Clean Air Act Section 608’s prohibition A. What are the statutory requirements and final rule lists five flammable refrigerant on venting, release, or disposal the four authority for the SNAP program? substitutes as acceptable, subject to use hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes B. What is EPA’s regulation implementing conditions, in several refrigeration and listed in this action as acceptable, Section 612? air conditioning end-uses: Household subject to use conditions, in specific C. How do the regulations for the SNAP refrigerators and freezers; retail food end-uses. We are finalizing this program work? refrigeration, stand-alone equipment exemption for those substitutes, subject D. Where do I find additional information only; very low temperature refrigeration; to those use conditions and in those about the SNAP program? non-mechanical heat transfer; vending end-uses, on the basis of current III. What action is the Agency taking? A. Listing decisions: Substitutes and end- machines; and room air conditioning evidence that their venting, release, or uses (AC) units. The five refrigerant disposal does not pose a threat to the B. What are ethane, isobutane, propane, substitutes are: Difluoromethane (also environment. HFC–32, R–441A, and the ASHRAE known as hydrofluorocarbon (HFC)-32), DATES: This rule is effective on May 11, classifications for refrigerant ethane, isobutane, propane, and the flammability? 2015. The incorporation by reference of hydrocarbon blend R–441A. The use certain publications listed in the rule is C. Use conditions D. Venting prohibition conditions address safe use of approved by the Director of the Federal E. Recommendations for the safe use of flammable refrigerants and include Register as of May 11, 2015. flammable substitute refrigerants incorporation by reference of portions of ADDRESSES: EPA has established a IV. What criteria did EPA consider in certain safety standards from docket for this action under Docket ID determining whether to list the Underwriters Laboratories (UL), No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0748. All substitutes as acceptable and in refrigerant charge size limits, and documents in the docket are listed on determining the use conditions, and how requirements for markings on the www.regulations.gov index. does EPA consider those criteria? equipment using these refrigerants. This Although listed in the index, some A. Effects on the environment B. Flammability action also exempts from CAA Section information is not publicly available, C. Toxicity and asphyxiation 608’s prohibition on venting, release, or i.e., Confidential Business Information V. What are the differences between the disposal the hydrocarbon refrigerant (CBI) or other information whose proposed and final rules? substitutes ethane, isobutane, propane, disclosure is restricted by statute. VI. What are EPA’s responses to public and R–441A in specific end-uses for Certain other material, such as comments? which they are being listed in this copyrighted material, is not placed on A. EPA’s acceptability determinations rulemaking. We are finalizing this the Internet and will be publicly B. Environmental and public health exemption for those substitutes on the available only in hard copy form. impacts basis of current evidence that their Publicly available docket materials are C. Toxicity D. Flammability venting, release, or disposal from these available either electronically in E. Use conditions specific end-uses does not pose a threat www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at F. Technician training to the environment. the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, G. Venting prohibition This final rule lists all five refrigerants EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 H. Cost and economic impacts as acceptable, subject to use conditions, Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, I. Statutory and executive order reviews in the same end-uses as in the proposed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19455

rule. This final rule retains the same use number of climate-friendly alternatives still apply. For example, for those conditions as proposed for household for various kinds of refrigeration and AC refrigerant substitutes listed in this refrigerators and freezers; retail food equipment. Using low-GWP alternatives action that contain volatile organic refrigeration, stand-alone equipment instead of high-GWP HFCs reduces compounds (VOC) as defined in 40 CFR only; very low temperature refrigeration; climate-damaging emissions. Use and 50.100(s), i.e., isobutane, propane, and non-mechanical heat transfer; and emissions of HFCs are rapidly R–441A,2 a state might adopt additional vending machines. For room AC units, increasing because they are the primary control strategies if necessary for an EPA is retaining the same use substitutes for ozone-depleting ozone nonattainment area to attain the conditions as proposed, with one substances, especially in many of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard exception. For portable AC units, EPA is largest end-uses. Though they represent (NAAQS) for ozone. not applying the proposed charge limits a small fraction of current total With the exception of HFC–32, the for packaged terminal AC (PTAC) units, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, their refrigerants listed as acceptable, subject packaged terminal heat pumps (PTHP), warming impact is hundreds to to use conditions, in this action are and other floor mounted AC units, thousands of times higher than that of hydrocarbons or blends consisting which are set forth in Table D. In this CO2 and other GHGs. Further, if left solely of hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbon final rule, Table E (new) establishes unregulated, emissions of HFCs in the refrigerants have been in use for over 15 charge limits for portable AC units, United States are expected to double years in countries such as Germany, the consistent with the requirements in from current levels of 1.5 percent of United Kingdom, Australia, and Japan Appendix F of UL 484, ‘‘Room Air GHG emissions to 3 percent by 2020 and in household and commercial Conditioners,’’ 8th Edition, dated nearly triple by 2030.1 refrigerators and freezers. To a lesser August 2, 2012. EPA is making this This action lists as acceptable, subject extent, hydrocarbon refrigerants have change because we agree with to use conditions, five flammable also been used internationally in small commenters that the final rule should refrigerant substitutes that EPA believes AC units such as portable room air incorporate specific provisions for present overall lower risk to human conditioners. charge limits for portable units in UL health and the environment compared Because hydrocarbon refrigerants 484, which is the standard that is the to other available or potentially have zero ozone depletion potential basis of EPA’s other charge limits, as available alternatives in the same end- (ODP) and very low global warming well. This final rule exempts the four uses. The refrigerants include one HFC potentials (GWPs) compared to most hydrocarbon refrigerants for the end- refrigerant—HFC–32—and four other refrigerants, many companies uses addressed in the proposed rule hydrocarbon refrigerants—ethane, recently have expressed interest in from the venting prohibition under CAA isobutane, propane, and R–441A. We using hydrocarbons in the United Section 608. HFC–32 remains are listing these substitutes as States. Also, some companies have prohibited from being knowingly vented acceptable, subject to use conditions, in reported improved energy efficiency or otherwise knowingly released or a number of stationary AC and with hydrocarbon refrigerants (A.S. disposed of by any person maintaining, refrigeration end-uses under the SNAP Trust & Holdings, 2012; A/S Vestfrost, servicing, repairing, or disposing program, including: Household 2012; CHEAA, 2013). appliances containing HFC–32. refrigerators and freezers, retail food In a final rule published in the EPA received a total of 37 comments refrigeration, very low temperature Federal Register (FR) on December 20, from 35 commenters. Major topics refrigeration, non-mechanical heat 2011, at 76 FR 78832, EPA’s SNAP raised by commenters included: The transfer, vending machines, and program listed isobutane and R–441A as acceptability of each refrigerant; the residential and light commercial AC and acceptable, subject to use conditions, in environmental, flammability, and heat pumps. The use conditions set household refrigerators, freezers, and toxicity characteristics of the proposed requirements to ensure that these combination refrigerators and freezers, refrigerants; the cost impacts of using substitutes do not present significantly and listed propane as acceptable, the proposed refrigerants; the proposed greater risk in the end-use than other subject to use conditions, in retail food use conditions; EPA’s recommendations substitutes that are currently or refrigerators and freezers (stand-alone for safe handling of the refrigerants; potentially available for that same end- units only). In this action, EPA is listing technician training; the relationship use. This action is another regular isobutane, propane, and R–441A as between this proposed rule and the update to EPA’s lists of acceptable acceptable, subject to use conditions, in proposed rule Protection of substitutes through the SNAP program additional end-uses. Stratospheric Ozone: Change of Listing under the authority of CAA Section 612. This final action lists HFC–32 Status for Certain Substitutes under the This action responds to a number of (difluoromethane, Chemical Abstracts Significant New Alternatives Policy SNAP submissions for four hydrocarbon Service Registry Number [CAS Reg. No.] Program (August 6, 2014, 79 FR 46126); refrigerants and HFC–32. Additionally, 75–10–5) as acceptable, subject to use and the proposed exemption from CAA this action exempts from the prohibition conditions, in room air conditioners for Section 608’s prohibition on venting, under CAA Section 608 on venting, residential and light commercial AC and release, or disposal of the four release, or disposal, the four heat pumps end-use. There appears to hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes. hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes that be interest in using HFC–32 for many B. Background are listed as acceptable, subject to use reasons, including its GWP of 675, conditions, in specific end-uses, on the which is considerably lower than the Consistent with the Climate Action basis of current evidence that their GWPs of hydrochlorofluorocarbon Plan announced June 2013, which calls venting, release, or disposal does not (HCFC)-22 (1,810) and most other HFC- on EPA to ‘‘use its authority through the pose a threat to the environment. Note, based refrigerants (approximately 1,500 Significant New Alternatives Policy however, that other applicable to 4,000) currently used in this end-use. Program to encourage private sector environmental regulatory requirements It also has mild flammability compared investment in low-emissions technology to hydrocarbon refrigerants. Mini-split by identifying and approving climate- 1 Climate Change and President Obama’s Action friendly chemicals’’ (Climate Action Plan. June, 2013. Available in the docket and online 2 Neither ethane nor HFC–32 are VOC under the Plan, 2013), this final rule approves a at www.whitehouse.gov/share/climate-action-plan. definition at 40 CFR 51.100(s).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19456 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

systems using HFC–32 are now being rapidly in the atmosphere. For example, evaluated each of the SNAP criteria for sold in Japan and are being introduced the atmospheric concentration of HFC– each substitute in each end-use in India and Indonesia. 134a, the most abundant HFC, has addressed by this action. EPA then All of the end-uses in this final rule increased by about 10% per year from considered overall risk to human health are for stationary refrigeration or AC. 2006 to 2012, and concentrations of and the environment for each substitute EPA previously issued several final HFC–143a and HFC–125 have risen over in comparison to other available or rules addressing the use of flammable 13% and 16% per year from 2007–2011, potentially available alternatives in the refrigerants in motor vehicle air respectively (Montzka, 2012; NOAA, same end-uses. conditioning (MVAC). On June 13, 1995, 2013). C. Does this action apply to me? at 60 FR 31092, the Agency found all The alternatives addressed in this flammable substitutes to be action have GWPs significantly lower This action lists the following unacceptable for use in MVAC unless than both the ozone-depleting refrigerants as acceptable, subject to use specifically listed as acceptable, subject substances (ODS) and HFC substitute conditions, for use in specific end-uses to use conditions, because of refrigerants in the end-uses in which within the refrigeration and AC sector: flammability risks and the lack of they are being listed. ODS in the end- Ethane (R–170), HFC–32 (R–32), sufficient risk assessment and other uses in this final rule include isobutane (R–600a), propane (R–290), relevant information to demonstrate safe chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-12 (ODP 3 of 1 and the hydrocarbon blend R–441A. use in that end-use at that time. Some and GWP of 10,900), R–13B1 (also Types of residential and light of these risks are unique to motor known as bromotrifluoromethane or commercial AC equipment addressed in vehicles. In recent years, EPA has listed halon 1301, with ODP of 10 and GWP this action include window AC units; three low-GWP refrigerants as of 7,140), CFC–113 (ODP of 0.8 and packaged terminal AC units and heat acceptable, subject to use conditions, for GWP of 6,130), R–502 (a blend of CFC– pumps; and portable room AC units. MVAC systems (i.e., R–152a, R–1234yf, 115 and HCFC–22, with ODP of 0.334 Types of refrigeration equipment and R–744). Two of these refrigerants and GWP of 4,660), and HCFC–22 (ODP include stand-alone retail food are flammable, although less flammable of 0.055 and GWP of 1,810). The GWPs 4 refrigeration equipment, very low than hydrocarbons. Under 40 CFR part of the hydrocarbon refrigerants we are temperature freezers, thermosiphons 82, subpart G, Appendix B, all other adding to the SNAP lists in this rule are (non-mechanical heat transfer flammable substitutes remain less than 10, while HFCs listed as equipment), household refrigerators and unacceptable for use in MVAC because acceptable in the end-uses in this rule freezers, and vending machines. EPA has not taken action to specifically have GWPs ranging from 1,430 to 3,920. Table 1 identifies industry subsectors list them as acceptable, subject to use Thus, the listed refrigerants provide that may wish to explore the use of conditions. industry additional options with lower ethane, HFC–32, R–441A, isobutane, As stated above, this action is being atmospheric impacts. In this and propane in these end-uses or that taken under the President’s Climate rulemaking, however, EPA did not limit may work with equipment using these Action Plan. HFCs are accumulating its review to atmospheric impacts, but refrigerants in the future.

TABLE 1—POTENTIALLY REGULATED ENTITIES BY NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (NAICS) CODE OR SUBSECTOR

NAICS code Category or subsector Description of regulated entities

Industry ...... 325412 Pharmaceutical Preparations (e.g., Capsules, Liniments, Ointments, Tablets) Manufacturing. Industry ...... 333415 Manufacturers of Refrigerators, Freezers, and Other Refrigerating or Freezing Equipment, Electric or Other; Heat Pumps Not Elsewhere Specified or Included (NESOI); and Parts Thereof. Industry ...... 333415 Air-Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment and Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing. Industry ...... 443111 Appliance Stores: Household-type. Industry ...... 445120 Convenience Stores. Industry ...... 445110 Supermarkets and Other Grocery (except Convenience) Stores. Industry ...... 722211 Limited-Service Restaurants. Industry ...... 238220 Plumbing, Heating, and Air Conditioning Contractors. Industry ...... 811412 Appliance Repair and Maintenance. Industry ...... 423930 Recyclable Material Merchant Wholesalers. Industry ...... 423620 Household Appliances, Electric Housewares, and Consumer Electronics Merchant Wholesalers. Industry ...... 423740 Refrigeration Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.

This table is not intended to be entities likely to adopt, service or listed in this action. If you have any exhaustive, but rather a guide regarding dispose of the substitutes that are being questions about whether this action

3 Unless otherwise stated, the ODP values used in 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of available information for their components and the this document are those published in Appendices Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report range of GWPs found for other hydrocarbons in A and B to Subpart A of 40 CFR part 82. For of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC, 2007. For refrigerant blends, EPA has taken refrigerant blends, EPA has taken the ODPs for the [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. the 100-year integrated time horizon GWP from Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller component compounds and multiplied them by the IPCC, 2007 for the component compounds and (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, weight fraction of each component in the blend to United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. This multiplied them by the weight fraction of each obtain an approximate ODP. document is accessible at www.ipcc.ch/ component in the blend to obtain an approximate 4 GWPs for HFC–134a, HFC–32, the component publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html. GWP. Unless otherwise stated, GWPs stated in this HFCs comprising R–404A and R–410A, propane GWPs for isobutane and R–441A were provided by document are 100-year integrated time horizon and ethane are listed in IPCC, 2007: Climate Change the submitters to EPA and they are consistent with values taken from IPCC, 2007.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19457

applies to a particular entity, consult the MVAC—motor vehicle air conditioning chloroform, and person listed in the preceding section, NAAQS—National Ambient Air Quality hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Standard substance (HCFC) with any substitute NAFEM—North American Association of that the Administrator determines may D. What acronyms and abbreviations Food Equipment Manufacturers present adverse effects to human health are used in the preamble? NAICS—North American Industrial Classification System or the environment where the Below is a list of acronyms and NIOSH—the United States National Institute Administrator has identified an abbreviations used in this preamble. for Occupational Safety and Health alternative that (1) reduces the overall AC—air conditioning NOAA—the United States National Oceanic risk to human health and the ACGIH—American Conference of and Atmospheric Administration environment and (2) is currently or Governmental Industrial Hygienists NOAEL—No Observed Adverse Effect Level potentially available. ACH—air changes per hour NTTAA—National Technology Transfer and AEGL—acute exposure guideline level Advancement Act 2. Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable AHAM—Association of Home Appliance OEM—original equipment manufacturer Substitutes ODP—ozone depletion potential Manufacturers Section 612(c) requires EPA to AHRI—Air Conditioning, Heating and ODS—ozone-depleting substances Refrigeration Institute OHA—Office of Hearing and Appeals publish a list of the substitutes AIRAH—Australian Institute of Refrigeration, OMB—the United States Office of unacceptable for specific uses and to Air Conditioning and Heating Management and Budget publish a corresponding list of ANSI—American National Standards OSHA—the United States Occupational acceptable alternatives for specific uses. Institute Safety and Health Administration The list of acceptable substitutes may be ARA—Australian Refrigeration Association oz—ounce found at www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/lists, ASHRAE—American Society of Heating, PPE—personal protective equipment PEL—permissible exposure limit and the lists of ‘‘unacceptable,’’ Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning ‘‘acceptable subject to use conditions,’’ Engineers PFC—perfluorocarbon BTU—British thermal unit PMS—Pantone Matching System and ‘‘acceptable subject to narrowed use CAA—Clean Air Act ppb—parts per billion limits’’ substitutes are found in the CAS Reg. No.—Chemical Abstracts Service ppm—parts per million appendices to Subpart G of 40 CFR part Registry Number ppmv—parts per million by volume 82 as well as at www.epa.gov/ozone/ CARB—California Air Resources Board PRA—Paperwork Reduction Act snap/lists. CBI—Confidential Business Information psi—pounds per square inch CFC—chlorofluorocarbon PTAC—packaged terminal air conditioner 3. Petition Process PTHP—packaged terminal heat pump CFR—Code of Federal Regulations Section 612(d) grants the right to any CHEAA—Chinese Household Electrical RCRA—Resource Conservation and Recovery Act person to petition EPA to add a Appliance Association substance to, or delete a substance from, CMAQ—Community Multiscale Air Quality REL—Recommended Exposure Limit CRA—Congressional Review Act RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act the lists published in accordance with DOE—the United States Department of RSES—Refrigeration Service Engineers Section 612(c). The Agency has 90 days Energy Society to grant or deny a petition. Where the EIA—Environmental Investigation Agency- SIP—State Implementation Plan Agency grants the petition, EPA must U.S. SNAP—Significant New Alternatives Policy publish the revised lists within an STEL—short-term exposure limit EO—Executive Order additional six months. EPA—the United States Environmental STP—Standards Technical Panels Protection Agency TFA—trifluoroacetic acid 4. 90-Day Notification EU—European Union The Alliance—The Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy Section 612(e) directs EPA to require FR—Federal Register any person who produces a chemical ft—foot TLV—threshold limit value g—gram TWA—time-weighted average substitute for a class I substance to GHG—greenhouse gas UL—Underwriters Laboratories Inc. notify the Agency not less than 90 days GWP—global warming potential UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act before new or existing chemicals are U.S.C.—United States Code HCFC—hydrochlorofluorocarbon introduced into interstate commerce for VOC—volatile organic compounds HF—hydrogen fluoride significant new uses as substitutes for a HFC—hydrofluorocarbon II. How does the Significant New class I substance. The producer must HVACR—heating, ventilation, air Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program also provide the Agency with the conditioning and refrigeration work? producer’s unpublished health and ICF—ICF International, Inc. safety studies on such substitutes. ICOR—ICOR International, Inc. A. What are the statutory requirements IEC—International Electrotechnical and authority for the SNAP program? 5. Outreach Commission in.Hg—inches of mercury Section 612 of the CAA requires EPA Section 612(b)(1) states that the IPCC—Intergovernmental Panel on Climate to develop a program for evaluating Administrator shall seek to maximize Change alternatives to ozone depleting the use of federal research facilities and IPR—industrial process refrigeration substances (ODS). EPA refers to this resources to assist users of class I and ISRI—Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries program as the Significant New II substances in identifying and JTG—Joint Task Group Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. developing alternatives to the use of kg—kilogram The major provisions of Section 612 are such substances in key commercial kJ—kilojoule the following: applications. kPa—kilopascal lb—pound 1. Rulemaking 6. Clearinghouse LFL—lower flammability limit m—meter Section 612(c) requires EPA to Section 612(b)(4) requires the Agency mm—millimeter promulgate rules making it unlawful to to set up a public clearinghouse of MMTCO2eq—million metric tons of carbon replace any class I substance alternative chemicals, product dioxide equivalents (chlorofluorocarbon (CFC), halon, substitutes, and alternative MSDS—Material Safety Data Sheet carbon tetrachloride, methyl manufacturing processes that are

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19458 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

available for products and earlier than 90 days after notice has opportunity to comment, before manufacturing processes which use been provided to the Agency. EPA publishing final decisions. class I and II substances. considers that notice has been received In contrast, EPA publishes decisions once EPA receives the submission and B. What is EPA’s regulation concerning substitutes that are deemed determines that the submission includes implementing Section 612? acceptable with no restrictions as complete and adequate data (40 CFR ‘‘notices of acceptability’’ or On March 18, 1994, EPA published 82.180(a)). At that point, the SNAP the original rulemaking (59 FR 13044) ‘‘determinations of acceptability,’’ rather review begins. than as proposed and final rules. As which established the process for The Agency has identified four administering the SNAP program and described in the preamble to the rule possible decision categories for initially implementing the SNAP issued EPA’s first lists identifying substitutes that are submitted for acceptable and unacceptable substitutes program in the Federal Register at 59 evaluation: Acceptable; acceptable FR 13044 on March 18, 1994, EPA does in the major industrial use sectors subject to use conditions; acceptable (Subpart G of 40 CFR part 82). These not believe that rulemaking procedures subject to narrowed use limits; and are necessary to list alternatives that are eight sectors—refrigeration and AC; unacceptable 7 (40 CFR 82.180(b)). Use foam blowing; cleaning solvents; fire acceptable without restrictions because conditions and narrowed use limits are such listings neither impose any suppression and explosion protection; both considered ‘‘use restrictions’’ and sterilants; aerosols; adhesives, coatings sanction nor prevent anyone from using are explained below. Substitutes that are a substitute. and inks; and tobacco expansion—are deemed acceptable with no use the principal industrial sectors that restrictions (no use conditions or Many SNAP listings include historically consumed the largest narrowed use limits) can be used for all ‘‘Comments’’ or ‘‘Further Information’’ volumes of ODS. applications in the relevant end-uses to provide additional information on Section 612 of the CAA instructs EPA within the sector. Substitutes that are substitutes. Since this additional to list as acceptable those substitutes acceptable, subject to use conditions, information is not part of the regulatory that present a lower overall risk to may be used only in accordance with decision, these statements are not human health and the environment as those restrictions. binding for use of the substitute under compared with other substitutes that are After reviewing a substitute, the the SNAP program. However, regulatory currently or potentially available for a Agency may make a determination that requirements so listed may be binding specific use. a substitute is acceptable only if certain under other regulatory programs (e.g., C. How do the regulations for the SNAP conditions are met in the way that the worker protection regulations program work? substitute is used to minimize risks to promulgated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)). Under the SNAP regulations, anyone human health and the environment. EPA describes such substitutes as The ‘‘Further Information’’ identified in who plans to market or produce a the listing does not necessarily include substitute in one of the eight major ‘‘acceptable subject to use conditions.’’ Entities that use these substitutes all other legal obligations pertaining to industrial use sectors where class I or the use of the substitute. While the class II substances have been used must without meeting the associated use conditions are in violation of Section items listed are not legally binding provide notice to the Agency, including under the SNAP program, EPA health and safety information on the 612 of the CAA and EPA’s SNAP regulations (40 CFR 82.174(c)). encourages users of substitutes to apply substitute, at least 90 days before all statements in the ‘‘Further For some substitutes, the Agency may introducing it into interstate commerce Information’’ column in their use of permit a narrowed range of use within for significant new use as an alternative these substitutes. In many instances, the an end-use or sector. For example, the (40 CFR 82.176(a)). This requirement information simply refers to sound Agency may limit the use of a substitute applies to the persons planning to operating practices that have already to certain end-uses or specific introduce the substitute into interstate been identified in existing industry and/ 5 applications within an industry sector. commerce, who typically are chemical or building codes or standards. Thus EPA describes these substitutes as manufacturers but may include many of the statements, if adopted, ‘‘acceptable subject to narrowed use importers, formulators, equipment would not require the affected user to limits.’’ A person using a substitute that manufacturers, and end users when they make significant changes in existing is acceptable subject to narrowed use are responsible for introducing a operating practices. substitute into commerce.6 The CAA limits in applications and end-uses that and the SNAP regulations, 40 CFR are not consistent with the narrowed D. Where do I find additional 82.174(a), prohibit use of a substitute use limit is using the substitute in an information about the SNAP program? unacceptable manner and is in violation 5 As defined at 40 CFR 82.104, ‘‘interstate of Section 612 of the CAA and EPA’s For copies of the comprehensive commerce’’ means the distribution or transportation SNAP regulations (40 CFR 82.174(c)). SNAP lists of substitutes or additional of any product between one state, territory, The Agency publishes its SNAP information on SNAP, refer to EPA’s possession or the District of Columbia, and another Ozone Depletion Web site at: state, territory, possession or the District of program decisions in the Federal Columbia, or the sale, use or manufacture of any Register. EPA publishes proposed www.epa.gov/ozone/snap. For more product in more than one state, territory, possession decisions concerning substitutes that are information on the Agency’s process for or District of Columbia. The entry points for which deemed acceptable subject to use administering the SNAP program or a product is introduced into interstate commerce criteria for evaluation of substitutes, are the release of a product from the facility in restrictions (use conditions and/or which the product was manufactured, the entry into narrowed use limits), or substitutes refer to the SNAP final rulemaking in a warehouse from which the domestic manufacturer deemed unacceptable, as proposed the Federal Register at 59 FR 13044 on releases the product for sale or distribution, and at rulemakings to provide the public an March 18, 1994, codified at 40 CFR part the site of United States Customs clearance. 82, Subpart G. A complete chronology 6 As defined at 40 CFR 82.172, ‘‘end-use’’ means of SNAP decisions and the appropriate processes or classes of specific applications within 7 The SNAP regulations also include ‘‘pending,’’ major industrial sectors where a substitute is used referring to submissions for which EPA has not citations are found at: www.epa.gov/ to replace an ODS. reached a determination under this provision. ozone/snap/chron.html.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19459

III. What action is the Agency taking? Tubing.’’ This marking must be located equipment and in non-mechanical heat near the machine compartment. transfer, subject to the same use A. Listing Decisions: Substitutes and (c) ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire or conditions described above for End-Uses Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. isobutane and R–441A in stand-alone In this action, EPA is listing the Consult Repair Manual/Owner’s Guide retail food refrigeration equipment. following refrigerants as acceptable, Before Attempting To Service This Very low temperature refrigeration subject to use conditions, in the Product. All Safety Precautions Must be equipment is intended to maintain identified end-uses. Followed.’’ This marking must be temperatures considerably lower than 1. Retail food refrigeration. EPA finds located near the machine compartment. for refrigeration of food—for example, isobutane (also referred to as R–600a) (d) ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire or ¥80 °C (¥170 °F) or lower. Examples of and the hydrocarbon blend R–441A Explosion. Dispose of Properly In very low temperature refrigeration acceptable, subject to use conditions, as Accordance With Federal Or Local equipment include medical freezers and substitutes in retail food refrigeration Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant freeze-dryers, which generally require (new stand-alone retail food Used.’’ This marking must be provided extremely reliable refrigeration cycles to refrigeration equipment only). The use on the exterior of the refrigeration maintain low temperatures and must conditions require the following: equipment. meet stringent technical standards. In i. The quantity of the substitute (e) ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire or some cases, very low temperature refrigerant (i.e., ‘‘charge size’’) must not Explosion Due To Puncture Of refrigeration equipment may use a exceed 150 g (5.29 oz); Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling refrigeration system with two refrigerant Instructions Carefully. Flammable ii. These refrigerants may be used loops or with a direct expansion Refrigerant Used.’’ This marking must only in new equipment designed refrigeration loop coupled with an be provided near all exposed refrigerant specifically and clearly identified for alternative refrigeration technology (e.g., tubing. Stirling cycle). This allows a greater the refrigerant—i.e., none of these All of these markings must be in substitutes may be used as a conversion range of temperatures and may reduce letters no less than 6.4 mm (1⁄4 inch) or ‘‘retrofit’’ 8 refrigerant for existing the overall refrigerant charge. high. There is no U.S. standard that we are equipment; Retail food refrigeration includes the aware of that applies specifically to very iii. These refrigerants may be used refrigeration systems, including cold low temperature refrigeration or non- only in stand-alone retail food storage cases, designed to chill food or mechanical heat transfer. The submitter refrigeration equipment that meets all keep it at a cold temperature for of information for use of ethane in very requirements listed in Supplement SB commercial sale. Stand-alone retail food low temperature refrigeration has to the 10th edition of UL Standard 471, refrigeration equipment includes indicated that UL has tested their dated November 24, 2010. In cases appliances that use a sealed hermetic equipment for compliance with the UL where this final rule includes compressor and for which all 471 Standard for commercial requirements more stringent than those refrigerant-containing components, refrigeration equipment, which of the 10th edition of UL Standard 471, including but not limited to the addresses stand-alone commercial the appliance would need to meet the compressor, condenser, and evaporator, refrigerators and freezers. In this final requirements of the final rule in place are assembled into a single piece of rule, we are requiring compliance with of the requirements in the UL Standard; equipment before delivery to the the UL 471 Standard as one of the iv. The refrigerator or freezer must ultimate consumer or user. Such conditions for use of ethane in very low have red Pantone Matching System equipment does not require the addition temperature refrigeration equipment. (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, or or removal of refrigerant when placed This submission also addressed the other devices through which the into initial operation. Stand-alone use of ethane in a type of non- refrigerant passes, to indicate the use of equipment is used to chill or to store mechanical heat transfer equipment a flammable refrigerant. This color must chilled beverages or frozen products called a thermosiphon. Non-mechanical be present at all service ports and other (e.g., reach-in beverage coolers, stand- heat transfer involves cooling systems parts of the system where service alone ice cream cabinets, and wine that rely on convection to remove heat puncturing or other actions creating an coolers in commercial settings). from an area, rather than mechanical opening from the refrigerant circuit to This acceptability decision does not refrigeration. A thermosiphon is a type the atmosphere might be expected and apply to large commercial refrigeration of heat transfer system that relies on must extend a minimum of one (1) inch systems such as, but not limited to, natural convection currents, as opposed in both directions from such locations. remote direct expansion refrigeration to using a mechanical pump. This final v. The following markings, or the systems typically found in rule lists ethane as acceptable, subject to equivalent, must be provided and must supermarkets. This acceptability use conditions, for use in non- be permanent: decision also does not apply to walk-in mechanical heat transfer. The use (a) ‘‘DANGER—Risk of Fire or coolers. The SNAP submission did not conditions include a requirement to Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. apply to these types of systems. meet Supplement B to the UL 471 Do Not Use Mechanical Devices To Moreover, these types of equipment Standard and a charge limit of 150 g. We Defrost Refrigerator. Do Not Puncture typically require larger charges than note that some other types of non- Refrigerant Tubing.’’ This marking must those established in this use condition mechanical heat transfer equipment be provided on or near any evaporators for the end-use addressed in this rule would be expected to present different that can be contacted by the consumer. and are sufficiently different that we technical issues than a thermosiphon in (b) ‘‘DANGER—Risk of Fire or would need additional information a freezer and are not part of this Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. before making a listing decision. decision, e.g., equipment designed for To Be Repaired Only By Trained Service 2. Very low temperature refrigeration cooling the engine compartment of Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant and non-mechanical heat transfer. EPA heavy duty vehicles, organic Rankine finds ethane (also referred to as R–170) cycle equipment, or geothermal systems. 8 Sometimes conversion refrigerant substitutes are acceptable, subject to use conditions, in 3. Household refrigerators and inaccurately referred to as ‘‘drop in’’ replacements. very low temperature refrigeration freezers. EPA finds propane (also

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19460 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

referred to as R–290) acceptable, subject December 30, 2011 (instead of of UL Standard 484, ‘‘Room Air to use conditions, as a substitute in Supplement SB to the 10th edition of Conditioners.’’ In cases where this final household refrigerators and freezers and UL 471). Supplement SA specifically rule includes requirements more combination refrigerator/freezers. The addressing flammable refrigerants is stringent than those of the 8th edition of use conditions require the following: very similar to the Supplement SB in UL Standard 484, the appliance would i. The charge size for any household the UL 471 Standard for commercial need to meet the requirements of the refrigerator, freezer, or combination refrigerators and freezers, and thus, final rule in place of the requirements refrigerator and freezer for each circuit similar requirements apply to these in the UL Standard; using R–290 must not exceed 57 g (2.01 types of refrigeration equipment. In UL iii. UL 484 includes charge limits for oz); 541, the relevant references on room air conditioners and adherence to ii. This refrigerant may be used only equipment markings for flammable those charge limits would normally be in new equipment specifically designed refrigerants in Supplement A are confirmed by the installer. In addition and clearly identified for the Sections SA 6.1.2–SA 6.1.5. to requiring the charge limits in the UL refrigerant—i.e., none of these Vending machines are self-contained 484 Standard, EPA is requiring the substitutes may be used as a conversion units for refrigerating beverages or food following charge size limits, adherence or ‘‘retrofit’’ refrigerant for existing which dispense goods that must be kept to which must be confirmed by the equipment; cold or frozen. This end-use differs from original equipment manufacturer iii. This substitute may be used only other retail food refrigeration because (OEM). In cases where the charge size in equipment that meets all goods are dispensed, rather than limit listed is different from those requirements in Supplement SA to the allowing the consumer to reach in to determined by UL 484, the smaller of 10th edition of UL Standard 250, dated grab a beverage or food product. The the two charge sizes would apply. For August 25, 2000. In cases where this design of the refrigeration system of a a review of how these charge size limits final rule includes requirements more vending machine is similar to that of a were derived, see ‘‘Derivation of Charge stringent than those of the 10th edition self-contained commercial refrigerator Limits for Room Air Conditioners,’’ of UL Standard 250, the appliance or freezer. Typically the difference lies (EPA, 2015) in the docket. The charge would need to meet the requirements of in how payment for goods is made and size limit must be determined based on the final rule in place of the in the selection mechanisms found in the type of equipment, the alternative requirements in the UL Standard; vending machines but not in self- refrigerant used, and the normal rated iv. The refrigerator or freezer must contained commercial refrigerator- capacity of the unit. The limits are have red PMS #185 marked pipes, freezers, and possibly the outer casing presented in Tables 2 through 6 below hoses, and other devices through which (e.g., glass doors and open, reach-in in Section III.C.3, ‘‘Charge size,’’ and in the refrigerant passes to indicate the use designs are generally used in self- Tables A, B, C, D and E of the regulatory of a flammable refrigerant; contained commercial refrigerator- text at the end of this preamble. v. Permanent markings must be freezers whereas glass wall and other iv. The air conditioner must have red provided on the equipment, as types of casings are used for vending PMS #185 marked pipes, hoses, or other described above for stand-alone machines). We are aware that for devices through which the refrigerant commercial refrigerators and freezers. vending machines, it is possible to passes to indicate the use of a All of these markings must be in letters detach easily and replace the flammable refrigerant. This color must no less than 6.4 mm (1⁄4 inch) high. refrigeration circuit from the outer be present at all service ports and other Household refrigerators, freezers, and casing of the equipment. In such a parts of the system where service combination refrigerator/freezers are situation, replacing the old refrigeration puncturing or other actions creating an intended primarily for residential use, circuit with a new one within the old opening from the refrigerant circuit to although they may be used outside the casing would be considered ‘‘new’’ the atmosphere might be expected and home. Household freezers only offer equipment and not a retrofit of the old, must extend a minimum of one (1) inch storage space at freezing temperatures, existing equipment. in both directions from such locations; unlike household refrigerators. Products 5. Residential and light commercial v. The following markings, or the with both a refrigerator and freezer in a AC and heat pumps. EPA finds propane equivalent, must be provided and must single unit are most common. Wine (also known as R–290), difluoromethane be permanent: coolers used in residential settings are (also known as HFC–32 or R–32), and (a) On the outside of the air considered part of this end-use. EPA R–441A acceptable, subject to use conditioner: ‘‘DANGER—Risk of Fire or previously found the flammable conditions, as substitutes in residential Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. hydrocarbon refrigerants isobutane and and light commercial AC for self- To Be Repaired Only By Trained Service R–441A acceptable, subject to use contained room air conditioners, Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant conditions, in this end-use (December including PTAC units and PTHPs, Tubing.’’ 20, 2011, at 76 FR 78832, codified at window AC units, and portable AC (b) On the outside of the air Appendix R of Subpart G of 40 CFR part units designed for use in a single room. conditioner: ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire 82). The use conditions require the or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In 4. Vending machines. EPA finds R– following: Accordance With Federal Or Local 441A, isobutane, and propane as i. These refrigerants may be used only Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant acceptable substitutes in vending in new equipment designed specifically, Used.’’ machines, subject to the same use and clearly identified, for the (c) On the inside of the air conditioner conditions described above for stand- refrigerant—i.e., none of these near the compressor: ‘‘CAUTION—Risk alone retail food refrigeration substitutes may be used as a conversion of Fire or Explosion. Flammable equipment, except that paragraph iii. or ‘‘retrofit’’ refrigerant for existing Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair reads as follows: equipment; Manual/Owner’s Guide Before Equipment must meet all ii. These refrigerants may be used Attempting To Service This Product. All requirements of Supplement SA to the only in air conditioners that meet all Safety Precautions Must be Followed.’’ 7th edition of UL Standard 541, requirements listed in Supplement SA (d) For portable air conditioners, ‘‘Refrigerated Vending Machines,’’ dated to the 8th edition, dated August 2, 2012, PTAC and PTHP, on the outside of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19461

product: ‘‘WARNING: Appliance shall ducts. These systems are not addressed refrigerants in certain refrigeration and be installed, operated and stored in a in this rule. AC end-uses. It is legal to use those room with a floor area larger than ‘‘X’’ • Window air conditioners. These are refrigerants in the specified types of m2 (Y ft2).’’ The value ‘‘X’’ must be self-contained units that fit in a window equipment under the conditions determined using the minimum room with the condenser extending outside identified above. Use in the specified size in m2 calculated using Appendix F the window. These types of units are types of equipment that is not consistent of UL 484. The evaporator must remain regulated under this rule. with the use conditions is a violation of no higher than 0.6 m above the floor. • PTAC and PTHP. These are self- CAA Section 612 and EPA’s (e) For window air conditioners, on contained units that consist of a implementing regulations for the SNAP the outside of the product: ‘‘WARNING: separate, un-encased combination of program. Both the equipment Appliance shall be installed, operated heating and cooling assemblies mounted manufacturers and the end users must and stored in a room with a floor area through a wall.10 These types of units comply with these use conditions. 2 2 are regulated under this rule. larger than ‘‘X’’ m (Y ft ).’’ The value • The regulatory text of our decisions ‘‘X’’ must be determined using the Portable room air conditioners. for the end-uses discussed above minimum room size in m2 calculated These are self-contained, factory-sealed, appears in tables at the end of this using Appendix F of UL 484. The single package units that are designed to preamble. This text will be codified at evaporator must remain no higher than be moved easily from room to room and 40 CFR part 82 Subpart G. We note that are intended to provide supplemental 1.06 m above the floor. All of these there may be other legal obligations cooling within a room. These units markings must be in letters no less than pertaining to the manufacture, use, typically have wheels or casters for 6.4 mm (1⁄4 inch) high. handling, and disposal of hydrocarbons portability and, under the UL 484 The residential and light commercial that are not included in the information Standard for room air conditioners, AC and heat pumps end-use includes listed in the tables (e.g., Section 608 must have a fan which operates equipment for cooling air in individual prohibition on venting, releasing, or continuously when the unit is on. rooms, in single-family homes, and disposing of refrigerant substitutes or Portable room air conditioners may sometimes in small commercial Department of Transportation contain an exhaust hose that can be buildings. This end-use differs from requirements for transport of flammable placed through a window or door to commercial comfort AC, which uses eject heat to the outside. These types of gases). chillers that cool water that is then used units are regulated under this rule. B. What are ethane, isobutane, to cool air throughout a large Of these types of equipment, window propane, HFC–32, R–441A, and the commercial building, such as an office air conditioners, PTAC, PTHP, and ASHRAE classifications for refrigerant building or hotel. Examples of portable room air conditioners are self- flammability? equipment for residential and light contained equipment with the Ethane, isobutane, and propane are commercial AC and heat pumps condenser, compressor, evaporator, and hydrocarbons and R–441A is a include: hydrocarbon blend. Hydrocarbons are • tubing all within casing in a single unit. Central air conditioners, also called These units all fall under the scope of highly flammable organic compounds unitary AC or unitary split systems. the UL 484 Standard for room air made up of hydrogen and carbon. These systems include an outdoor unit conditioners. In contrast, unitary split Ethane has two carbons, the chemical with a condenser and a compressor, systems, multi-split systems and mini- formula of C2H6, and the CAS Reg. No. refrigerant lines, an indoor unit with an split systems have an outdoor condenser 74–84–0. Propane has three carbons, the evaporator, and ducts to carry cooled air that is separated from an indoor unit. formula C3H8, and the CAS Reg. No. 74– throughout a building. Central heat Compared to split systems, self- 98–6. Isobutane has four carbons, the pumps are similar but offer the choice contained equipment typically has formula C4H10, also written as to either heat or cool the indoor space. smaller charge sizes, has fewer locations CH(CH3)2CH3 to distinguish it from n- These systems are not addressed in this that are prone to leak, and is less likely butane, and the CAS Reg. No. 75–28–5. rule.9 to require servicing by a technician, As refrigerants, ethane, propane, and • Multi-split air conditioners. These thereby causing refrigerant releases. A isobutane can be referred to by the systems include one or more outdoor lower risk of refrigerant releases and a American Society of Heating, unit(s) with a condenser and a potential for smaller releases and lower Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning compressor and multiple indoor units, concentration releases results in lower Engineers (ASHRAE) designations R– each of which is connected to the risk that flammable refrigerant could be 170, R–290, and R–600a, respectively. outdoor unit by refrigerant lines. These ignited. Thus, self-contained air R–441A, also known by the trade name systems are not addressed in this rule. conditioners and heat pumps using a ‘‘HCR–188C,’’ is a hydrocarbon blend 11 • Mini-split air conditioners. These flammable refrigerant have lower risk consisting of 55% propane, 36% n- systems include an outdoor unit with a for fire than split systems using a butane, 6% isobutane, and 3% ethane condenser and a compressor and a flammable refrigerant. EPA notes that by weight. single indoor unit that is connected to split system AC systems present HFC–32 is a mildly flammable organic the outdoor unit by refrigerant lines. different technical challenges than self- compound made up of hydrogen, Cooled air exits directly from the indoor contained room AC equipment and are unit rather than being carried through not part of this decision. 11 EPA notes that under the SNAP program, we 6. Summary. In summary, EPA is review and list refrigerants with specific 9 EPA has received submissions for HFC–32 and listing ethane, isobutane, propane, compositions (59 FR 13044; March 18, 1994). To the the hydrocarbon blends R–441A and R–443A, and HFC–32, and R–441A as acceptable, extent possible, we follow ASHRAE’s designations no other flammable refrigerants, in new unitary for refrigerants. Blends of refrigerants must be central air conditioners.This action does not subject to use conditions, as substitute reviewed separately. For example, we consider each address flammable refrigerants in unitary central air blend of propane with isobutane to be a different conditioners. Introduction into interstate commerce 10 Packaged terminal air conditioners are and unique refrigerant, and each would require of refrigerants without giving timely and adequate intended for use in a single room, or potentially for separate submission, review and listing. Thus, notice to EPA is in violation of Section 612(e) of two rooms next to each other, and use no external blends of the refrigerants that we are listing as the CAA and the SNAP regulations at 40 CFR part refrigerant lines. Typical applications include motel acceptable, subject to use conditions, in this rule 82, subpart G. or dormitory air conditioners. are not acceptable.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19462 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

carbon, and fluorine with the chemical indices. The refrigerants are also they have a maximum burning velocity formula CF2H2 (CAS Reg. No. 75–10–5). assigned a flammability classification of of 10 cm/s or lower when tested at The American National Standards 1, 2, or 3. Tests are conducted in 23.0 °C and 101.3 kPa. The flammability Institute (ANSI)/ASHRAE Standard 34– accordance with ASTM E681 using a classification ‘‘3’’ is given to refrigerants 2010 assigns a safety group spark ignition source at 60 °C and 101.3 that, when tested, exhibit flame classification for each refrigerant which kPa (ASHRAE, 2010). Figure 1 in ANSI/ propagation and that either have a heat consists of two alphanumeric characters ASHRAE Standard 15–2007 uses the of combustion of 19,000 kJ/kg (8,174 (e.g., A2 or B1). The capital letter same safety group but limits its BTU/lb) or greater or an LFL of 0.10 kg/ indicates the toxicity and the numeral concentration to 3,400 ppm. m3 or lower. Thus, refrigerants with denotes the flammability. ASHRAE The flammability classification ‘‘1’’ is flammability classification ‘‘3’’ are classifies Class A refrigerants as given to refrigerants that, when tested, refrigerants for which toxicity has not show no flame propagation. The highly flammable, while those with been identified at concentrations less flammability classification ‘‘2’’ is given flammability classification ‘‘2’’ are less than or equal to 400 parts per million to refrigerants that, when tested, exhibit flammable and those with flammability (ppm) by volume, based on data used to flame propagation, have a heat of classification ‘‘2L’’ are mildly determine threshold limit value-time- combustion less than 19,000 kJ/kg flammable. For both toxicity and weighted average (TLV–TWA) or (8,174 British thermal units (BTU)/lb), flammability classifications, refrigerant consistent indices. Class B signifies and have a lower flammability limit blends are designated based on the refrigerants for which there is evidence (LFL) greater than 0.10 kg/m3. worst-case of fractionation determined of toxicity at concentrations below 400 Refrigerants within flammability for the blend (which may be different ppm by volume, based on data used to classification 2 may optionally be when evaluating toxicity than when determine TLV–TWA or consistent designated in the LFL subclass ‘‘2L’’ if evaluating flammability).

Using these safety group that are currently or potentially into interstate commerce of these classifications, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard available. refrigerants for use in existing 34–2010 categorizes ethane, isobutane, equipment, or for other end-uses, 1. New Equipment Only; Not Intended propane, and R–441A in the A3 Safety without giving timely and adequate for Use as a Retrofit Alternative Group and categorizes HFC–32 in the notice to EPA is in violation of Section A2L Safety Group. The refrigerants listed in this final 612(e) of the CAA and the SNAP rule may be used only in new regulations at 40 CFR part 82, subpart G. C. Use Conditions equipment 12 designed to address In addition, use of these refrigerants in EPA is listing ethane, isobutane, concerns unique to flammable existing equipment is in violation of propane, HFC–32, and R–441A as refrigerants—i.e., none of these Section 612(c) of the CAA and the acceptable, subject to use conditions, in substitutes may be used as a conversion corresponding SNAP regulations at 40 the specified end-uses. The use or ‘‘retrofit’’ refrigerant for existing CFR part 82, subpart G. conditions include conditions equipment. The flammable refrigerants 2. Standards consistent with industry standards, were not submitted under the SNAP limits on charge size, and requirements program to be used in retrofitted The flammable refrigerants may be for warnings and markings on equipment, and no information was used only in equipment that meets all equipment to inform consumers and provided on how to address hazards of requirements in the relevant technicians of potential flammability flammable refrigerants when used in supplements for flammable refrigerants hazards. The listings with specific use equipment that was designed for non- in certain applicable UL standards for conditions are intended to allow for the flammable refrigerants. Introduction refrigeration and AC equipment. use of these flammable refrigerants in a Specifically, the cited supplements manner that will ensure they do not 12 This is intended to mean a completely new include Supplement SB to UL 471 10th pose a greater risk to human health or refrigeration circuit containing a new evaporator, edition for commercial refrigerators and the environment than other substitutes condenser and refrigerant tubing. freezers (including stand-alone freezers

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 ER10AP15.000 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19463

for very low temperature refrigeration), equipment manufacturers and purchase refrigeration) is in line with the IEC Supplement SA to UL 250 10th edition is not required for those selling, 60335–2–89 Standard for commercial (for household refrigerators and installing and servicing the equipment. appliances, which has a charge size freezers), Supplement SA to UL 541 7th Therefore, EPA concludes that the UL limit of 150 g (5.29 oz). edition for refrigerated vending standards being incorporated by As noted above, EPA is requiring a machines, and Supplement SA to UL reference are reasonably available. varying charge size for room AC units. 484 8th edition for room air The maximum charge must be no 3. Charge Size conditioners. greater than the amount calculated for a UL has tested equipment for The refrigerants listed in this final given sized space according to flammability risk in household and rule are subject to use conditions that Appendix F to Supplement SA of UL retail food refrigeration, vending limit the amount of refrigerant allowed Standard 484. This section of the UL machines, and room AC. Further, UL in each type of appliance. Consistent standard uses a formula for the charge has developed acceptable safety with previous actions, EPA believes it is of a fixed room air conditioner based standards including requirements for necessary to set limits on charge size in upon the size of the space where the construction, for markings, and for order for these refrigerants not to pose refrigerant may escape and the LFL of performance tests concerning refrigerant a risk to human health or the the refrigerant. Height of the mounting leakage, ignition of switching environment that is greater than the risk of the unit is also a variable, because components, surface temperature of posed by other available substitutes. empirical studies have found that parts, and component strength after These limits will reduce the risk to leaked refrigerant is more likely to mix being scratched. These standards were workers and consumers since under thoroughly with the surrounding air, developed in an open and consensus- worst-case scenario analyses, a leak of rather than pooling, when the AC unit based approach, with the assistance of the maximum charge sizes allowed is mounted higher. The formula is as experts in the refrigeration and AC under the use conditions did not result follows: industry as well as experts involved in in concentrations of the refrigerant that assessing the safety of products. While met or exceeded the LFL, as explained similar standards exist from other below in Section IV.B, ‘‘Flammability.’’ bodies such as the International The limitations on refrigerant charge Where, Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), this size for household and stand-alone Mmax is the maximum charge size allowed for rule relies on UL standards because they retail food refrigeration equipment, the space, in kg, are most applicable and recognized by vending machines, and room AC units LFL is the lower flammability limit of the the U.S. market. reflect the UL 250, UL 471, UL 541 and refrigerant in kg/m3, UL 484 Standards. As discussed above h0 is the installation height of the indoor unit i. Incorporation by Reference in Section III.C.2, ‘‘Standards,’’ we in m (0.6 m for an AC unit on the floor, This approach is the same as that in believe UL standards are most 1.0 m for an AC unit in a window, 1.8 m for a wall-mounted AC unit, and 2.2 our previous rule on flammable applicable to the U.S. market and offer m for a ceiling-mounted AC unit), and refrigerants (December 20, 2011 at 76 FR requirements developed by a consensus A is the floor area of the room, in m2. 78832), through which EPA of experts. EPA is requiring a charge incorporated by reference to 40 CFR part size not to exceed 57 g (2.01 oz) for The equipment manufacturer would 82, appendix R to subpart G, household refrigerators and freezers, not then design AC units to be used in Supplement SA to UL 250 10th edition to exceed 150 g (5.29 oz) for retail food rooms with a minimum size and would and Supplement SB to UL 471 10th refrigeration in stand-alone units, and label the minimum room size on the edition. Through this action the EPA is not to exceed 150 g (5.29 oz) for vending equipment. incorporating by reference relevant machines. The maximum charge size In addition to the formula above, UL supplements from two additional UL limit for room AC units varies, as 484 has a requirement that the standards: Supplement SA to UL 541 discussed below. To place these maximum charge for a fixed room air 7th edition and Supplement SA to UL quantities in context, the charge size of conditioner may not exceed the amount 484 8th edition. These supplements are a disposable lighter is approximately calculated using the following formula: 3 × summarized elsewhere in this 30 g (1.06 oz). m2 = (26 m ) LFL document. The UL 250 Standard for household Where, The UL Standards are available for refrigerators and freezers limits the m2 is the maximum charge size allowed, in purchase by mail at: COMM 2000; 151 amount of refrigerant that may leak to kg, Eastern Avenue; Bensenville, IL 60106; no more than 50 g (1.76 oz). EPA is 26 m3 is a constant, and Email: [email protected]; requiring a charge size of 57 g (2.01 oz) LFL is the lower flammability limit of the 3 Telephone: 1–888–853–3503 in the U.S. to allow for up to 7 g (0.25 oz) of refrigerant in kg/m . or Canada (other countries dial +1–415– refrigerant that might be solubilized in That formula sets maximum limits on 352–2168); Internet address: http:// the oil (and assumed not to leak or refrigerant in a room air conditioner. ulstandardsinfonet.ul.com/ or immediately vaporize with the With the A3 refrigerants, the maximum www.comm-2000.com. The cost of a refrigerant in case of a leak). EPA bases value is 1 kg. single standard is $400–$500 for this estimate on information received In addition, Appendix F of UL 484 electronic and $500-$630 for hardcopy. from a manufacturer of hydrocarbon- sets alternative requirements for non- An outline of UL 484 may be purchased based refrigerator-freezers (see EPA– fixed units such as portable air for $150 electronically or $175 for a HQ–OAR–2009–0286–0033 on conditioners. Portable air conditioners hardcopy. UL also offers a subscription www.regulations.gov). are usually located on the floor of a service to the Standards Certification UL Standards 471 (retail food room, and thus, if they followed the Customer Library (SCCL) that allows refrigeration) and 541 (vending formula for fixed appliances, they unlimited access to their standards and machines) limit the amount of would be assumed to have a height of related documents. The cost of refrigerant leaked to 150 g (5.29 oz). 0.6 m, and would have relatively low obtaining these standards is not a Furthermore, the charge size limit for charge sizes. However, Sections F.1.7 significant financial burden for A3 refrigerants (for retail food uses a different formula that allows for

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 ER10AP15.001 19464 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

a potentially larger charge size for non- an inappropriately sized AC unit that needed also provides a better means for fixed units. Sections F.1.8 through increases the flammability risk. Or, a EPA to ensure compliance with the use F.1.14 of UL 484 set additional consumer may believe that a larger, conditions, and thus to ensure that the requirements for non-fixed units to more powerful AC unit will provide risk to human health will not be greater further reduce flammability risk. Among better, faster cooling and therefore may than that posed by other available these provisions are requirements for a select an inappropriately sized AC unit substitutes. We believe that these drop test, a vibration test, and a that increases the flammability risk. To requirements, in combination with the continuously operating fan, which address these concerns, EPA is other use conditions and commonly would ensure that any leaked refrigerant supplementing the charge size found informational materials, provide is rapidly mixed and its concentration guidelines in Appendix F of UL 484 sufficient safeguards against instances of reduced. Thus, a different approach is with a use condition that restricts the consumers selecting inappropriately- used in the formula for determining maximum refrigerant charge of charge sizes of non-fixed units; for equipment based upon the cooling sized equipment. example, the height of 0.6 m that might capacity needed, in BTU/hour. EPA has based its charge limits upon otherwise be assumed for PTACs is not Equipment manufacturers are appropriate capacity needs for an area to used for a portable unit. responsible for designing equipment be cooled and the requirements for Although using a formula to below a maximum charge size refrigerant charge relative to room size determine the maximum charge size and consistent with the intended cooling in Appendix F of UL 484, discussed minimum room size is appropriate from capacity. This will allow the above. A document in the docket an engineering perspective, it does not manufacturer, who is better positioned describes this relationship in tables in a ensure that a consumer will select an than the consumer, to address these spreadsheet (EPA, 2015). The charge appropriate AC unit for the size of their challenges. Placing the responsibility on limits for each refrigerant by equipment room. It is likely that some consumers the manufacturer to design equipment type and mounting location are as may be unaware of the exact size of the that restricts the maximum refrigerant follows: room to be cooled and thus may select charge based upon the cooling capacity TABLE 2—WINDOW AC UNITS * [Maximum charge size by unit capacity and refrigerant used]

Charge size in kg Refrigerant (by associated capacity in BTU/hr) 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30,000 34,000

R–32 ...... 1.73 2.12 2.74 3.00 3.24 3.47 3.68 4.07 4.59 5.48 6.01 6.49 6.72 7.76 R–290 ...... 0.13 0.16 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.27 0.30 0.34 0.40 0.44 0.48 0.50 0.57 R–441A ...... 0.14 0.17 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.33 0.37 0.44 0.49 0.53 0.54 0.63 * Assumes the evaporator is at least 1 m, but not more than 1.8 m, above the floor. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

TABLE 3—PACKAGED TERMINAL AC UNITS AND HEAT PUMPS * [Maximum charge size by unit capacity and refrigerant used]

Charge size in kg Refrigerant (by associated capacity in BTU/hr) 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30,000 34,000

R–32 ...... 1.04 1.27 1.65 1.80 1.95 2.08 2.21 2.44 2.75 3.29 3.60 3.89 4.03 4.65 R–290 ...... 0.08 0.09 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.24 0.27 0.29 0.30 0.34 R–441A ...... 0.08 0.10 0.13 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.27 0.29 0.32 0.33 0.38 * Assumes the evaporator is at least 0.6 m, but not more than 1.0 m, above the floor. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

TABLE 4—WALL-MOUNTED AC UNITS * WITH COMPRESSOR 1.8 m ABOVE FLOOR LEVEL * [Maximum charge size by unit capacity and refrigerant used]

Charge size in kg Refrigerant (by associated capacity in BTU/hr) 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30,000 34,000

R–32 ...... 3.12 3.82 4.94 5.41 5.84 6.24 6.62 7.32 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 R–290 ...... 0.23 0.28 0.36 0.40 0.43 0.46 0.49 0.54 0.61 0.73 0.80 0.86 0.89 1.00 R–441A ...... 0.25 0.31 0.40 0.44 0.47 0.51 0.54 0.59 0.67 0.80 0.88 0.95 0.98 1.00 * Assumes the evaporator is at least 1.8 m, but not more than 2.2 m, above the floor. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19465

TABLE 5—CEILING-MOUNTED AC UNITS * [Maximum charge size by unit capacity and refrigerant used]

Charge size in kg Refrigerant (by associated capacity in BTU/hr) 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30,000 34,000

R–32 ...... 3.82 4.67 6.03 6.61 7.14 7.63 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 R–290 ...... 0.28 0.34 0.44 0.49 0.53 0.56 0.60 0.66 0.74 0.89 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 R–441A ...... 0.31 0.38 0.49 0.54 0.58 0.62 0.66 0.73 0.82 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 * Assumes the evaporator is at least 2.2 m above the floor. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

TABLE 6—PORTABLE ROOM AC UNITS * [Maximum charge size by unit capacity and refrigerant used]

Charge size in kg Refrigerant (by associated capacity in BTU/hr) 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30,000 34,000

R–32 ...... 1.56 2.35 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 R–290 ...... 0.19 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 R–441A ...... 0.21 0.31 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 * Assumes equipment meeting UL 484 requirements for non-fixed equipment. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

In cases where the rated capacity container of flammable refrigerants conditioners that are designed to use exceeds the maximum shown on the under the Air Conditioning, Heating and one of the refrigerants subject to the table, the maximum charge size in the Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) Guideline acceptability determinations in this table for that refrigerant applies. In cases ‘‘N’’ 2012, ‘‘2012 Guideline for action. EPA is requiring that the where the normal rated capacity lies Assignment of Refrigerant Container warning labels on the equipment between two values listed next to each Colors.’’ contain letters at least 1⁄4 inch high, and other in the table, the maximum charge A cost-effective alternative to painting be permanently affixed to the size should be determined based on a or dying the hose or pipe would be to equipment. Warning label language instead add a colored plastic sleeve or linear interpolation between the two requirements are found in Section III.A respective charge sizes. We assume that cap to the service tube that is the same of this rule, ‘‘Listing decisions: room air conditioners will be at least red color (PMS #185). The sleeve could substitutes and end-uses,’’ as well as in 5,000 BTU/hr in capacity; this also be boldly marked with a graphic to corresponds to cooling a floor area of indicate that the refrigerant is the regulatory text. The warning label roughly 100 square feet or 9.3 m2 and flammable. The colored plastic sleeve or language is similar to or exactly the it is the lowest value observed at a cap would have to be installed in such same as that required in the following popular retailer’s Web site a way as to require that it be forcibly UL standards: UL 250 in Section SA6.1 (www.homedepot.com). removed in order to access the service for household refrigerators and freezers; tube. This would alert the technician UL 541 in Section SA6.1 for vending 4. Color-Coded Hoses and Piping that the refrigeration circuit that she/he machines; UL 471 in Section SB6.1 for Equipment must have distinguishing was about to access contained a commercial refrigerators and freezers; color-coded hoses and piping to flammable refrigerant, even if all and UL 484 in Section SA6.1 for room indicate use of a flammable refrigerant. warning labels were somehow removed. AC units. This will help alert technicians EPA is also concerned with ensuring EPA believes that it would be difficult immediately to the use of a flammable adequate notification of the presence of to see warning labels with the minimum refrigerant, thereby reducing the risk of flammable refrigerants for personnel lettering height requirement of 1⁄8 inch using sparking equipment or otherwise disposing of appliances containing provided in these UL standards. having an ignition source nearby. The flammable refrigerants. AC and refrigeration industry currently EPA believes the use of color-coded Therefore, consistent with the use uses distinguishing colors as a means of hoses or piping (including the use of conditions in our previous hydrocarbon identifying different refrigerants in sleeves), as well as the use of warning refrigerants rule (December 20, 2011 at containers, and so this approach is labels discussed below, is reasonable 76 FR 78832), the minimum height for consistent with industry practice. and consistent with other general lettering must be 1⁄4 inch as opposed to Likewise, distinguishing coloring has industry practices. This approach is the 1⁄8 inch, which will make it easier for been used elsewhere to indicate an same as that adopted in our previous technicians, consumers, retail unusual and potentially dangerous rule on flammable refrigerants storeowners, and emergency first situation, for example in the use of (December 20, 2011, at 76 FR 78832). responders to view the warning labels. orange-insulated wires in hybrid electric We understand that UL is considering 5. Labeling vehicles. Currently, no industry revising its standards to be consistent standard exists for color-coded hoses or As a use condition, EPA is requiring with this requirement. pipes for ethane, HFC–32, isobutane, labeling of new household and retail propane, or R–441A. The final use refrigerators and freezers, vending condition requires all such refrigerator machines, non-mechanical heat transfer tubing to be colored red PMS #185 to equipment, very low temperature match the red band displayed on the refrigeration equipment, and room air

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19466 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

D. Venting Prohibition when the Administrator determines that On May 23, 2014, at 79 FR 29682, such venting, release, or disposal does EPA exempted from the venting 1. What are the statutory requirements not pose a threat to the environment. prohibition three hydrocarbon concerning venting, release, or disposal refrigerant substitutes listed as of refrigerants and refrigerant substitutes 2. What are EPA’s regulations acceptable, subject to use conditions, in under section 608 of the CAA? concerning venting, releasing, or the specified end-uses: isobutane and disposing of refrigerant substitutes? The statutory requirements R–441A, as refrigerant substitutes in concerning venting, release, or disposal Regulations promulgated under household refrigerators, freezers, and of refrigerants and refrigerant substitutes Section 608 of the Act, published on combination refrigerators and freezers; are under Section 608 of the CAA. May 14, 1993 (58 FR 28660), established and propane as a refrigerant substitute Section 608 of the Act as amended, a recycling program for ozone-depleting in retail food refrigerators and freezers titled National Recycling and Emission refrigerants recovered during the (stand-alone units only). That rule does Reduction Program, requires EPA to servicing and maintenance of not apply to blends of hydrocarbons establish regulations governing the use refrigeration and AC appliances. In the with other refrigerants or containing any and disposal of ODS used as same 1993 rule, EPA also promulgated amount of any CFC, HCFC, HFC, or PFC. refrigerants, such as certain CFCs and regulations implementing the Section In that action, EPA determined that HCFCs, during the service, repair, or 608(c) prohibition on knowingly for the purposes of CAA Section disposal of appliances and industrial venting, releasing, or disposing of class 608(c)(2), the venting, release, or process refrigeration (IPR). EPA’s I or class II controlled substances. These disposal of such hydrocarbon refrigerant authority to promulgate the regulatory regulations were designed to substitutes in the specified end-uses revisions in this action is based in part substantially reduce the use and does not pose a threat to the on Section 608 of the CAA. Section emissions of ozone-depleting environment, considering both the 608(c)(1) provides that it is unlawful for refrigerants. inherent characteristics of these any person, in the course of EPA issued a final rule on March 12, substances and the limited quantities maintaining, servicing, repairing, or 2004, at 69 FR 11946, and a second rule used in the relevant applications. EPA disposing of an appliance (or IPR), to on April 13, 2005, at 70 FR 19273, further concluded that other authorities, knowingly vent, or otherwise knowingly clarifying how the venting prohibition controls, or practices that apply to such release or dispose of, any class I or class in Section 608(c) applies to substitutes refrigerant substitutes help to mitigate II substance used as a refrigerant in that for CFC and HCFC refrigerants (e.g., environmental risk from the release of appliance (or IPR) in a manner which HFCs and perfluorocarbons (PFCs)) those three hydrocarbon refrigerant permits the ODS to enter the during the maintenance, service, repair, substitutes. For example, state and local environment. or disposal of appliances. These air quality agencies may include VOC Section 608(c)(1) further exempts regulations are codified at 40 CFR part emissions reduction strategies in State from this self-effectuating prohibition de 82, subpart F. In relevant part, they Implementation Plans (SIPs) developed minimis releases associated with good provide that no person maintaining, to meet and maintain the NAAQS that faith attempts to recapture and recycle servicing, repairing, or disposing of would apply to hydrocarbon or safely dispose of such a substance. appliances may knowingly vent or refrigerants. EPA, as set forth in its regulations, otherwise release into the environment interprets releases to meet the criteria any refrigerant or substitute from such 3. What is EPA requiring regarding for exempted de minimis releases if they appliances, with the exception of the venting, release, or disposal of occur when the recycling and recovery following substitutes in the following refrigerant substitutes, other than requirements of regulations end-uses, effective June 23, 2014: hydrocarbons, included in this action? promulgated under sections 608 and (A) Isobutane and R–441A in This rule regulates the use of HFC–32 609 are followed. 40 CFR 82.154(a)(2). household refrigerators, freezers, and in room AC units. All HFCs are Section 608(c)(2) extends the combination refrigerators and freezers; currently subject to the venting prohibition in Section 608(c)(1) to or prohibition. EPA is not extending the knowingly venting or otherwise (B) Propane in retail food refrigerators exemption to the venting prohibition in knowingly releasing or disposing of any and freezers (stand-alone units only). this action to HFC–32 or any refrigerant refrigerant substitute for class I or class As explained in an earlier EPA blends that contain HFC–32 or any other II substances by any person rulemaking concerning refrigerant HFC. Further, the exemption to the maintaining, servicing, repairing, or substitutes, EPA has not promulgated venting prohibition in this action does disposing of appliances or IPR. This regulations requiring certification of not extend to blends containing prohibition applies to any substitute refrigerant recycling/recovery hydrocarbons with other types of unless the Administrator determines equipment intended for use with compounds, e.g., blends of HFCs and that such venting, releasing, or substitutes to date (70 FR 19275; April hydrocarbons. Such refrigerant disposing does not pose a threat to the 13, 2005). However, as EPA noted, the substitutes are still subject to the environment. Thus, section 608(c) lack of a current regulatory provision statutory and regulatory venting provides EPA authority to promulgate should not be considered as an prohibition. regulations to interpret, implement, and exemption from the venting prohibition enforce this prohibition on venting, for substitutes that are not expressly 4. What is EPA’s determination releasing, or disposing of class I or class exempted in Section 82.154(a) (id.). EPA regarding whether venting of II substances and their refrigerant has also noted that, in accordance with hydrocarbons listed as acceptable, substitutes, which we refer to as the Section 608(c) of the Act, the regulatory subject to use conditions, in the end- ‘‘venting prohibition’’ in this action. prohibition at Section 82.154(a) reflects uses in this action poses a threat to the EPA’s authority under Section 608(c) the statutory references to de minimis environment? includes authority to implement Section releases of substitutes as they pertain to For purposes of Section 608(c)(2) of 608(c)(2) by exempting certain good faith attempts to recover and the CAA, EPA considers two factors in substitutes for class I or class II recycle or safely dispose of non- determining whether or not venting, substances from the venting prohibition exempted substitutes (id.). release, or disposal of a refrigerant

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19467

substitute during the maintenance, analysis and modeling results described the flammability risks and occupational servicing, repairing, or disposing of in the proposal and in Section IV.A of exposures to hydrocarbons are appliances poses a threat to the this preamble, EPA concludes that the adequately regulated by OSHA and environment. See 69 FR 11948 (March four hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes building and fire codes at a local and 12, 2004); 79 FR 29682 (May 23, 2014). listed in this action for their specific national level. First, EPA analyzes the threat to the end-uses are expected to have little iii. Authorities, Controls, or Practices environment due to inherent impact on local air quality. characteristics of the refrigerant In addition, when examining all EPA believes that existing authorities, substitute, such as GWP. Second, EPA hydrocarbon substitute refrigerants in controls, or practices will mitigate determines whether and to what extent those uses for which UL currently has environmental risk from the release of venting, release, or disposal actually standards in place, for which the SNAP these hydrocarbon refrigerant takes place during the maintenance, program has already listed the uses as substitutes. Analyses performed for both servicing, repairing, or disposing of acceptable subject to use conditions, or this rule and the SNAP rules issued in appliances, and to what extent such for which the SNAP program is 1994 and 2011 (March 17, 1994, at 59 actions are controlled by other reviewing a submission, including those FR 13044 and December 20, 2011, at 76 authorities, regulations, or practices. To in this rule, we found that even if all the FR 38832, respectively) indicate that the extent that such releases are refrigerant in appliances in end-uses existing regulatory requirements and adequately controlled by other addressed in this rule were to be industry practices designed to limit and authorities, EPA defers to those emitted, there would be a worst-case control these substances adequately authorities. In addition, we considered impact of less than 0.15 ppb for ground- control the emission of the hydrocarbon the public comments we received on the level ozone in the Los Angeles area. In refrigerant substitutes listed in this proposed rule on this topic. We received light of its evaluation of potential action. As explained below, EPA no comments that caused us to change environmental impacts, EPA concludes concludes that the limits and controls our proposed conclusion that venting, that the four hydrocarbon refrigerant under other authorities, regulations, or release, or disposal of the specified substitutes in the end-uses at issue in practices adequately control the release refrigerant substitutes in the specified this rule are not expected to pose a of and exposure to the four hydrocarbon end-uses does not pose a threat to the threat to the environment on the basis refrigerant substitutes and mitigate risks environment. Therefore, we are of the inherent characteristics of these from any possible release. finalizing this portion of the rule as substances and the limited quantities As mentioned above, the originally proposed. used in the relevant end-uses (ICF, determination of whether venting, 2014a). release, or disposal of a substitute i. Potential environmental impacts refrigerant poses a threat to the EPA has evaluated the potential ii. Toxicity and Flammability environment includes considering the environmental impacts of releasing into As discussed in Sections IV.B, extent that such venting, release, or the environment the four hydrocarbon ‘‘Flammability’’ and IV.C., ‘‘Toxicity disposal is adequately controlled by refrigerant substitutes that we are listing and asphyxiation,’’ EPA’s SNAP other authorities, regulations, or under the SNAP program as acceptable, program evaluated the flammability and practices. As such, this conclusion is subject to use conditions, in the toxicity risks from the substitute another part of the determination that specified end-uses—i.e., ethane in very refrigerants in this rule. EPA is the venting, release, or disposal of these low temperature refrigeration providing some of that information in four hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes, equipment and equipment for non- this section as well. in the specified end-uses and subject to mechanical heat transfer; isobutane in Hydrocarbons, including ethane, the use conditions in this action, does retail food refrigerators and freezers propane, isobutane and the hydrocarbon not pose a threat to the environment. (stand-alone equipment only) and blend R–441A, are classified as A3 Industry service practices and OSHA vending machines; propane in refrigerants by ASHRAE Standard 34– standards and guidelines that address household refrigerators and freezers and 2010, indicating that they have low hydrocarbon refrigeration equipment, combination refrigerators and freezers, toxicity and high flammability. include monitoring efforts, engineering vending machines, and self-contained Hydrocarbons in this rule have LFLs controls, and operating procedures. room air conditioners for residential and ranging from 1.8% to 3.0% (18,000 ppm OSHA requirements that apply during light commercial air conditioning and to 30,000 ppm). To address flammability servicing include continuous heat pumps; and R–441A in retail food risks, this rule contains monitoring of explosive gas refrigerators and freezers (stand-alone recommendations for their safe use (see concentrations and oxygen levels. In equipment only), vending machines, Section III.E., ‘‘Recommendations for general, hydrocarbon emissions from and self-contained room air the safe use of flammable substitute refrigeration systems are likely to be conditioners for residential and light refrigerants’’ below) and specified use significantly smaller than those commercial air conditioning and heat conditions. The SNAP program’s emanating from the industrial process pumps. In particular, we assessed the analysis suggests that the use conditions and storage systems, which are potential impact of the release of in this rule mitigate flammability risks. controlled for safety reasons. In the additional hydrocarbons on local air Like most refrigerants, at high SNAP listings in Section III.A, ‘‘Listing quality and their ability to decompose concentrations hydrocarbons can decisions: substitutes and end-uses,’’ we in the atmosphere, their ODP, their displace oxygen and cause note that the amount of refrigerant GWPs, and potential impacts on asphyxiation. Various industry and substitute from a refrigerant loop is ecosystems. regulatory standards exist to address limited: 57 g for household refrigerators As explained in Section IV.A, ‘‘Effects asphyxiation and toxicity risks. The and freezers; 150 g for commercial on the environment,’’ the ODP of these SNAP program’s analysis of stand-alone refrigerators and freezers, hydrocarbons is zero, the GWPs are less asphyxiation and toxicity risks suggests very low temperature refrigeration than 10, and effects on aquatic life are that the use conditions in this rule equipment non-mechanical heat transfer expected to be small. As to potential mitigate asphyxiation and toxicity risks. equipment, and vending machines; with effects on local air quality, based on the Furthermore, the Agency believes that larger but still limited charges for room

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19468 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

air conditioners (1,000 g for these end-uses and subject to these use large quantities of flammable hydrocarbon refrigerants). This conditions. In light of these conclusions refrigerants during servicing and indicates that hydrocarbon emissions and those described or identified above manufacturing, especially in enclosed, from such uses are likely to be relatively in this section, EPA is determining that poorly ventilated spaces or in areas small. based on current evidence and risk where large amounts of refrigerant are Hydrocarbons that are also VOC may analyses, the venting, release, or stored, could cause an explosion if an be regulated as VOC under sections of disposal of these four hydrocarbon ignition source exists nearby. For these the CAA that address nonattainment, refrigerant substitutes in these end-uses, reasons, it is important that only attainment, and maintenance of the and during the maintenance, servicing, properly trained technicians handle NAAQS for ground-level ozone, repairing or disposing of the relevant flammable refrigerant substitutes when including those sections addressing appliances or equipment, does not pose maintaining, servicing, repairing, or development of SIPs and those a threat to the environment. disposing of household and retail food addressing permitting of VOC sources. Furthermore, EPA is exempting from the refrigerators and freezers, very low The release and/or disposal of many venting prohibition at 40 CFR temperature freezers, non-mechanical refrigerant substitutes, including 82.154(a)(1) these additional end-uses heat transfer equipment (e.g., hydrocarbons, are controlled by other for which these hydrocarbons are being thermosiphons), and room air authorities including those established listed as acceptable, subject to use conditioners. In addition, EPA by OSHA and the National Institute for conditions, under the SNAP program. recommends that if hydrocarbon Occupational Safety and Health’s This exemption does not mean that refrigerant substitutes are vented, (NIOSH) guidelines, various standards, hydrocarbons can be vented in all released, or disposed of (rather than and state and local building codes. To situations at this time. Hydrocarbons recovered), as would be allowed in most the extent that release during being recovered, vented, or otherwise of the specified end-uses in this rule, maintaining, repairing, servicing, or disposed of from commercial and the release should be in a well- disposing of appliances is controlled by industrial appliances are likely to be ventilated area, such as outside of a regulations and standards of other hazardous waste under the Resource building. authorities, EPA believes these practices Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) We are aware that at least two and controls for the use of hydrocarbons (see 40 CFR parts 261–270). As organizations, Refrigeration Service are sufficiently protective. These discussed in the final rule allowing for Engineers Society (RSES) and the ESCO practices and controls mitigate the risk the venting of isobutane and R–441A as Institute, have developed technician to the environment that may be posed refrigerant substitutes in household training programs in collaboration with by the venting, release, or disposal of refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigeration equipment manufacturers these four hydrocarbon refrigerants refrigerators and freezers, and propane and users that address safe use of during the maintaining, servicing, as a refrigerant substitute in retail food flammable refrigerant substitutes. In repairing, or disposing of appliances. refrigerators and freezers (stand-alone addition, EPA has reviewed several EPA is now aware of equipment that units only), incidental releases may training programs provided as part of can be used to recover hydrocarbon occur during the maintenance, service, SNAP submissions from persons refrigerants. While there are no relevant and repair of appliances. Nor would this interested in flammable refrigerant U.S. standards for such recovery activity be subject to RCRA substitutes. The agency intends to equipment, to the extent that these requirements for the disposal of update the test bank for technician hydrocarbons are recovered rather than hazardous waste, as such releases would certification under Section 608 of the vented in specific end-uses and not constitute disposal of the refrigerant CAA as we have done previously, and equipment, EPA recommends the use of charge as a solid waste, per se. Disposal will consider including additional recovery equipment designed of hydrocarbons from household questions on flammable refrigerants. By specifically for flammable refrigerants in appliances is also not considered adding such questions to the test bank, accordance with applicable safe disposal of a hazardous waste under the EPA would supplement but would not handling practices. existing RCRA regulations and could be replace technician training programs iv. Conclusion vented under the household hazardous currently provided by non-government waste exemption. See 40 CFR entities. EPA will seek additional EPA has reviewed the potential 261.4(b)(1). However, for commercial information and guidance on how best environmental impacts of the four and industrial appliances, it is likely to incorporate this content through a hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes in that flammable hydrocarbon refrigerant separate process outside of this final the end-uses in this action, as well as substitutes would be classified as rule. the authorities, controls, and practices hazardous waste and would need to be IV. What criteria did EPA consider in in place for those hydrocarbon managed as hazardous waste under the determining whether to list the refrigerant substitutes. EPA also RCRA regulations (40 CFR parts 261– substitutes as acceptable and in considered the public comments on the 270). proposal for this action. Based on this determining the use conditions, and review, EPA concludes that these four E. Recommendations for the Safe use of how does EPA consider those criteria? hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes in Flammable Substitute Refrigerants As discussed above, Section 612(c) of these end-uses and subject to these use EPA recommends that only the CAA directs EPA to publish lists of conditions are not expected to pose a technicians specifically trained in acceptable substitutes for specific uses. threat to the environment based on the handling flammable refrigerant EPA considers whether the risks to inherent characteristics of these substitutes dispose of or service human health and the environment of a substances and the limited quantities refrigeration and AC equipment substitute poses less risk than that used in the relevant applications. EPA containing these substances. posed by other substitutes that are additionally concludes that existing Technicians should know how to currently or potentially available. EPA authorities, controls, or practices help minimize the risk of fire and the also considers whether the substitute for mitigate environmental risk from the procedures for using flammable class I and class II ODS poses lower release of those four hydrocarbons in refrigerant substitutes safely. Releases of overall risk to human health and the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19469

environment as compared to the ODS impacts on aquatic life. These and other HCFC–22 (GWP = 1,810); and R–502 historically used in the end-use. The environmental and health risks are (GWP = 4,660) (IPCC, 2007). criteria we review are listed at 40 CFR discussed below. As stated above, EPA considers 82.180(a)(7). These criteria are: (i) The ODP is the ratio of the impact on overall risk to human health and the atmospheric effects and related health stratospheric ozone of a chemical environment compared to alternatives and environmental impacts; (ii) general compared to the impact of an identical that are available and potentially population risks from ambient exposure mass of CFC–11. Thus, the ODP of CFC– available in a given end-use. Therefore, to compounds with direct toxicity and 11 is defined to be one (1.0). Other ODS while the GWP of 675 for HFC–32 is to increased ground-level ozone; (iii) have ODPs that range from 0.01 to ten considered low for the residential and ecosystem risks; (iv) occupational risks; (10.0). light-commercial AC and heat pumps (v) consumer risks; (vi) flammability; All refrigerant substitutes in this final end-use, it may not be considered low and (vii) cost and availability of the rule have an ODP of zero, lower than the in other end-uses that have a larger substitute. ODP of ozone depleting refrigerants variety of substitutes with lower GWPs. EPA evaluated each of the criteria for such as CFC–12 (ODP = 1.0); HCFC–22 Among the acceptable substitutes listed each substitute in each end-use in this (ODP = 0.055); R–13B1 (ODP = 10) and in the residential and light-commercial action and then for each substitute, we R–502 (ODP = 0.334). The most AC and heat pumps end-use, only considered overall risk to human health commonly used substitutes in the end- ammonia absorption and the non-vapor and the environment in comparison to uses addressed in this final rule also compression technologies evaporative other available or potentially available have an ODP of zero (e.g., R–404A, R– cooling and desiccant cooling have alternatives in the same end-uses. Based 134a, R–410A, and R–407C).13 Some lower GWPs than the substitutes listed on our evaluations, we may reach less common alternatives for these end- in this final rule in this end-use. different conclusions about the same uses, such as R–401A, R–414A, and The total environmental effects substitute in different end-uses, because other blends containing HCFC–22 or impacts of these refrigerants also of different risk profiles (e.g., different HCFC–142b,14 have ODPs ranging from depend upon the energy use of exposure levels and usage patterns) and 0.01 to 0.047. Thus, the refrigerant appliances, since the ‘‘indirect’’ GHG different sets of available or potentially substitutes in this rule have ODPs lower emissions associated with electricity available substitutes for each end-use. than or identical to the ODPs of other consumption typically exceed those As we have noted previously, available substitutes and of ODS from refrigerants over the full lifecycle environmental and human health historically used in the end-uses of refrigerant-containing products. exposures can vary significantly addressed in this rule. (ORNL, 1997). If appliances designed to depending on the particular application The GWP is a means of quantifying use refrigerants listed as acceptable in this final rule are less energy efficient of a substitute—and over time, the potential integrated climate forcing information available regarding a than the appliances they replace, then it of various GHGs relative to carbon substitute can change. See 78 FR at is possible that these appliances would dioxide. Each of the hydrocarbon 29035 (May 17, 2013). SNAP’s result in higher lifecycle GHG emissions refrigerants in this final rule has a comparative risk framework does not than appliances using a higher GWP relatively low 100-year integrated GWP imply fundamental tradeoffs with refrigerant or refrigerant substitute. of less than ten while HFC–32 has a respect to different types of risk, either Conversely, higher energy efficiency of GWP of 675. For comparison, some to the environment or to human health. these appliances would lead to even other commonly used refrigerants For example, in this rule, we considered lower lifecycle GHG emissions. currently listed as acceptable in retail all the human health and environmental While we have not undertaken a food refrigeration, vending machines, criteria, and addressed the potential comprehensive assessment of all risks from flammability by imposing use and household refrigerators and freezers sources of GHG emissions associated conditions, rather than deciding that end-uses are R–134a, R–404A, and R– with substituting ODS and other other criteria were more important. EPA 407C, with GWPs of about 1,430, 3,920, commonly used refrigerants with the recognizes that during the more than and 1,770, respectively. In very low refrigerants in this final rule, we note two-decade history of the SNAP temperature refrigeration, a commonly- that energy efficiency standards exist for program, new information about used substitute is R–508B, with a GWP most of the types of equipment covered alternatives already found acceptable of 13,400. An ODS in this end-use is R– here.15 Thus, total energy use with the has become available and new 13B1/halon 1301 with a GWP of 7,140. substitute refrigerants we are finding alternatives have emerged. To the extent The GWPs of the substitutes in this final acceptable in this action can be possible, for each SNAP review, EPA rule are significantly lower than those of expected to be no higher than that considers information current at the other refrigerants currently being used required by the standards for those time of the review which has improved in the residential and light commercial classes of equipment.16 Further, testing our understanding of the risk factors for AC and heat pump end-use, such as the the environment and human health in HFC blend substitute R–410A. In 15 For example, Department of Energy (DOE) the context of the available or addition, the substitutes in this rule standards apply to portable air conditioners, room air conditioners, PTACs and PTHPs, household potentially available alternatives for a have lower GWPs than those of ODS in this end-use, CFC–12 (GWP = 10,900); refrigerators and freezers, refrigerated beverage given use. vending machines, and commercial refrigeration equipment. See https://www1.eere.energy.gov/ A. Effects on the Environment 13 We assume that substitutes containing no buildings/appliance_standards/standards_test_ The SNAP program considers a chlorine, bromine, or iodine have an ODP of zero. procedures.html. 14 Under EPA’s phaseout regulations, virgin 16 Refrigeration or air conditioning equipment in number of environmental criteria when HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends containing the applicable covered equipment class would still evaluating substitutes: ODP; climate HCFC–22 or HCFC–142b may only be used to be subject to DOE’s standards, regardless of the effects, primarily based on GWP; local service existing appliances. Consequently, virgin refrigerant that the equipment uses. If a air quality impacts, particularly HCFC–22, HCFC–142b and blends containing manufacturer believes that its design is subjected to HCFC–22 or HCFC–142b may not be used to undue hardship by DOE’s regulations, the potential impacts on smog formation manufacture new pre-charged appliances or manufacturer may petition DOE’s Office of Hearing from emissions of VOC; and ecosystem appliance components or to charge new appliances and Appeals (OHA) for exception relief or effects, particularly from negative assembled onsite. Continued

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19470 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

data, peer-reviewed journal articles, and analysis was conservative in that it addressed in this final rule were to be other information provided by the assumed that the most reactive emitted, there would be a worst-case submitters for these substitute hydrocarbon subject to this action— impact of 0.15 ppb ozone in the Los refrigerants indicate that equipment isobutane—was used in all refrigeration Angeles area, which is the area with the using these refrigerants is likely to have and AC uses even though isobutane was highest level of ozone pollution in the a higher coefficient of performance and not proposed or listed as acceptable for United States. In the other cities use less energy than equipment use in all refrigeration and AC uses. In examined in the analysis, Houston and currently being manufactured that uses addition, the analysis assumed that all Atlanta, impacts were smaller (no more the most commonly used refrigerants refrigerant used was emitted to the than 0.03 and 0.01 ppb, respectively) that are listed as acceptable under atmosphere. In that highly conservative (ICF, 2014a). Because both the highly SNAP. This indicates that equipment scenario, the model predicted that the conservative as well as the conservative using the refrigerants listed will have maximum increase in the 8-hour but more probable assessments the same or lower climate impacts than average ground-level ozone indicated there would be relatively low other available substitutes (Daikin, concentration would be 0.72 ppb in Los air quality impacts of these refrigerants 2011; A.S. Trust & Holdings, 2012; A/S Angeles. if they are released to the atmosphere in Vestfrost, 2012; CHEAA, 2013). For further information on the limited amounts, EPA believes that In addition to global impacts on the potential impacts of this rule and other these refrigerants would not have a atmosphere, EPA evaluated potential decisions we might make, EPA also substantially greater impact on local air impacts of the substitutes on local air performed a less conservative analysis, quality than other refrigerants listed as quality. Ethane and HFC–32 are exempt looking at a set of end-uses that would acceptable in the end-uses in this final from the definition of VOC under CAA be more likely to use hydrocarbon rule. regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)) refrigerants between now and 2030. The Effects on aquatic life of the addressing the development of SIPs to analysis assumed use of hydrocarbon substitutes are expected to be small and attain and maintain the NAAQS. The refrigerants in those uses for which UL pose no greater risk of aquatic or other refrigerants, isobutane, propane, currently has standards in place, for ecosystem effects than those of other and components of R–441A, including which the SNAP program has already available substitutes for these uses. The isobutane, n-butane, and propane, are listed the uses as acceptable, subject to refrigerant substitutes in this rule are all VOC. Potential emissions of VOC from use conditions, or for which the SNAP highly volatile and would evaporate or all substitutes for all end-uses in the program is reviewing a submission, partition to air, rather than contaminate refrigeration and AC sector are including those in this rule.17 In surface waters. addressed by the venting prohibition addition, the air quality analysis B. Flammability under Section 608 of the CAA. Under assumed several different The flammability risks of the that prohibition, refrigerant substitutes hydrocarbons 18 would be used based substitutes are of concern because (and thus the VOC they contain) may upon those under review by the SNAP household and retail food refrigerators only be emitted where EPA issues a program in the end-uses for which they and freezers and room AC units have final determination exempting a were submitted. For example, we traditionally used refrigerants that are refrigerant substitute from the venting assumed use of propane, R–441A, and not flammable. Without appropriate use prohibition on the basis that venting, another hydrocarbon refrigerant under conditions, the flammability risk posed releasing or disposing of such substance review in room air conditioners; and by these refrigerants could be higher isobutane, propane, and R–441A in does not pose a threat to the than non-flammable refrigerants because vending machines, stand-alone retail environment. Based on an analysis individuals may not be aware that their food refrigeration equipment, and described below, EPA estimates that actions could potentially cause a fire, household refrigerators and freezers; but potential emissions of hydrocarbons if and because without the requirements no use of hydrocarbons in chillers used used as refrigerant substitutes in all end- of this rule, these refrigerants could be for AC of large buildings. (For further uses in the refrigeration and AC sector used in existing equipment that has not information on the specific would have little impact on local air been designed specifically to minimize assumptions, see ICF, 2014a, in the quality, with the possible exception of flammable risks. In this section, we unsaturated hydrocarbons such as docket for this rulemaking.) discuss the flammability risks posed by Based on this still conservative but propylene (ICF, 2014a). the refrigerants in this rule and explain more probable assessment of refrigerant EPA analyzed a number of scenarios the use conditions we believe are use, we found that even if all the to consider the potential impacts on necessary to mitigate those risks to refrigerant in appliances in end-uses local air quality if hydrocarbon ensure that the overall risk to human refrigerants were used widely. We used health and the environment posed by 17 The analysis included stand-alone retail food EPA’s Vintaging Model to estimate the these substitutes is not greater than the hydrocarbon emissions from these refrigeration equipment and coolers; vending machines; refrigerated transport; water coolers; overall risk posed by other substitutes in scenarios and EPA’s Community commercial ice machines; household refrigerators the same end-uses. In addition, we Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model and freezers; and room air conditioners (window discuss why the flammability risks have AC, PTAC, and PTHP). The analysis did not to assess their potential incremental led us to find that these substitutes are contributions to ground-level ozone expressly break out very low temperature refrigeration or non-mechanical heat transfer from only acceptable for use in new concentrations (ICF, 2014a). That commercial refrigerators and freezers. equipment specifically designed for 18 Refrigerants in this scenario included propane, these flammable refrigerants. exemption from the standard pursuant to OHA’s isobutane, and R–441A in the end-uses where they authority under Section 504 of the DOE are listed to be acceptable, subject to use Due to their flammable nature, ethane, Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7194), as implemented conditions, among others. Ethane was not expressly isobutane, propane, HFC–32, and R– at subpart B of 10 CFR part 1003. OHA has the included, since the type of equipment using ethane 441A could pose a significant safety authority to grant such relief on a case-by-case basis is not broken out separately in the analysis. concern for workers and consumers in if it determines that a manufacturer has However, ethane is less reactive than the other demonstrated that meeting the standard would refrigerants included in the analysis, so this the end-uses addressed in this rule if cause hardship, inequity, or unfair distribution of omission is expected to result in a slight they are not handled correctly. In the burdens. overestimation of impacts, if any. presence of an ignition source (e.g.,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19471

static electricity spark resulting from the risk of explosion. We are including Emergency Guideline Limits (AEGL).19 closing a door, using a torch during in the ‘‘Further Information’’ section of The respective workplace exposure service, or a short circuit in wiring that the SNAP listings recommendations that limits we considered for the various controls the motor of a compressor), an these facilities be equipped with proper compounds, including components of explosion or a fire could occur when the ventilation systems and be properly the refrigerant blend R–441A, are as concentration of refrigerant exceeds its designed to reduce possible ignition follows: LFL. The LFLs of the substitutes are: sources. The use conditions allow the • n-Butane, a component in R–441A: ethane—30,000 ppm; HFC–32—139,000 flammable refrigerants to be used 800 ppm NIOSH REL on 10-hr TWA; ppm; isobutane—18,000 ppm; without a higher risk to human health 6,900 ppm AEGL–1 over 30 minutes propane—21,000 ppm; and R–441A— and the environment than that posed by • Ethane: 1,000 ppm TLV on 8-hour 20,500 ppm. Therefore, to use these nonflammable substitutes. TWA; 3,000 ppm over 15 minutes substitutes safely, it is important to • HFC–32: 1,000 ppm manufacturer’s minimize the presence of potential C. Toxicity and asphyxiation exposure guideline on 8-hour TWA; ignition sources and to reduce the In evaluating potential toxicity 3,000 ppm over 15 minutes likelihood that the levels of ethane, impacts of ethane, HFC–32, isobutane, • Isobutane: 800 ppm REL on 10-hr HFC–32, isobutane, propane, or R–441A propane, and R–441A on human health, TWA; 6,900 ppm over 30 minutes will exceed the LFL. EPA considered both occupational and • Propane: 1,000 ppm PEL on 8-hr To determine whether flammability consumer risks. EPA investigated the TWA; 6,900 ppm AEGL–1 over 30 would be a concern for manufacturing risk of asphyxiation and of exposure to minutes and service personnel or for consumers, toxic levels of refrigerant for a plausible For equipment with which consumers EPA analyzed a plausible worst-case worst-case scenario and a typical use might come into contact, such as retail scenario to model a catastrophic release scenario for each refrigerant. In the food refrigerators and freezers, vending of the refrigerants. The worst-case worst-case scenario of a catastrophic machines, household refrigerators and scenario analysis for each refrigerant leak, we modeled release of the unit’s freezers, and room air conditioners, EPA revealed that even if the unit’s full full charge within one minute into a performed a consumer exposure charge is emitted within one minute, confined space to estimate analysis. In this analysis, we examined none of these refrigerants reached their concentrations that might result. We potential catastrophic release of the respective LFLs of 1.8% for isobutane, considered a conservatively small space entire charge of the substitute in one 2.1% for propane, 2.05% for R–441A, or appropriate to each end-use, such as a minute under a worst-case scenario. We 3.0% for ethane, provided that the small convenience store of 244 m3 for did not examine exposure to consumers charge sizes were no greater than those retail food refrigeration, a small galley in very low temperature refrigeration, specified in the relevant standard from kitchen of 18 m3 for a household since such equipment is typically used UL (ICF, 2014b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k). Thus, refrigerator/freezer, or a small bedroom in workplaces, such as in laboratories, there would not be a significant risk of of 41 m3 for a room air conditioner. and not in homes or public spaces. The fire or explosion, even under those To evaluate toxicity of all five analysis was undertaken to determine worst-case assumptions, so long as the refrigerants, EPA estimated the the 15-minute or 30-minute TWA charge meets the use conditions in this maximum TWA exposure both for a exposure levels for the substitute, which final rule. Detailed analysis of the short-term exposure scenario, with a 15- were then compared to the toxicity modeling results are discussed below in minute and 30-minute TWA exposure, limits to assess the risk to consumers. the next section regarding ‘‘Toxicity and and for an 8-hour TWA that would be EPA considered toxicity limits for asphyxiation.’’ consumer exposure that reflect a short- EPA also reviewed the submitters’ more typical of occupational exposure for a technician servicing the term exposure such as might occur at detailed assessments of the probability home or in a store or other public of events that might create a fire and equipment. We compared these short- term and long-term exposure values to setting where a member of the general engineering risk and approaches to public could be exposed and could then avoid sparking from the refrigeration relevant industry and government workplace exposure limits for ethane, escape. Specific toxicity limits that we equipment. Further information on used in our analysis of consumer these analyses and EPA’s risk HFC–32, isobutane, propane, and exposure include: assessments are available in public components of R–441A (including docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0748 at potential impurities). The modeling results indicate that both the short-term 19 The AEGL limit is an emergency guideline for www.regulations.gov. Although the exposures to the general population (including analysis showed no potential for the (15-minute and 30-minute) and long- susceptible populations) and is not time-weighted. released refrigerant from one piece of term (8-hour) worker exposure It also considers the chemical’s flammability in equipment to reach the LFL, concentrations would be below the addition to its toxicity. EPA develops a set of AEGL relevant workplace exposure limits, values for chemical for five exposure periods (10 manufacturing and service personnel or and 30 minutes, 1 hour, 4 hours and 8 hours). For consumers may not be familiar with such as the OSHA permissible exposure each exposure period, three different AEGL values refrigeration or AC equipment limit (PEL), the NIOSH recommended are developed to address different levels of containing a flammable refrigerant. exposure limit (REL), the American toxicological impacts. Of relevance for the modeled Conference of Governmental Industrial scenarios is the AEGL–1 (10,000 ppm), which is Therefore, use conditions are necessary defined as: ‘‘the airborne concentration, expressed to ensure that people handling such Hygienists’ (ACGIH) TLV, or in the case as parts per million or milligrams per cubic meter equipment are aware that the equipment of HFC–32, the manufacturer’s (pm or mg/m3) of a substance above which it is contains a flammable refrigerant and to recommended workplace exposure predicted that the general population including limit. In some cases where there was not susceptible individuals, could experience notable ensure safe handling. Because of discomfort, irritation, or certain asymptomatic existing OSHA and building code an established short-term exposure limit nonsensory effects. However, the effects are not requirements, we expect that the (STEL), we considered information on disabling and are transient and reversible upon equipment manufacturer, who would be short-term exposure such as the no cessation of exposure.’’ While permanent observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) toxicological effects are not expected up to the storing large quantities of the AEGL–2 value, this limit is not relevant for this refrigerant, is familiar with and uses from available toxicity studies or the analysis because at that level, flammability would proper safety precautions to minimize National Research Council’s Acute be a greater concern.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19472 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

• n-Butane: 6,900 ppm AEGL–1 over in Appendix F of UL 484, 8th Edition. machines, and (3) stand-alone retail 30 minutes This change allows larger charge sizes food refrigeration equipment, including • HFC–32: cardiotoxic NOAEL of for small portable units than in the refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerated 350,000 ppm over 5 minutes proposed rule and limits the charge size display cases. These correspond to the • Isobutane: 6,900 ppm over 30 to no more than 2.45 kg of HFC–32, 300 submissions for R–441A for household minutes g of propane, or 330 g of R–441A. window AC units, vending machines, • Propane: 6,900 ppm AEGL–1 over Proposed Table D was based on a new commercial refrigerators, 30 minutes different section of Appendix F of UL commercial freezers, and stand-alone The analysis of consumer exposure 484, 8th Edition. EPA is making this refrigerated display cases, and the assumed that 100 percent of the unit’s change because we agree with portable room air conditioners portion charge would be released over one commenters that the final rule should of the submission for new residential minute, at which time the concentration incorporate specific provisions for split-system AC units, residential heat of refrigerant would peak in an enclosed charge limits for portable units in UL pumps, and portable room air space, and then steadily decline. 484, which is the standard that is the conditioners. EPA is reviewing R–441A Refrigerant concentrations were basis of EPA’s other charge limits, as separately for new residential and light modeled under two air change well. commercial split-system AC units and scenarios, believed to represent the This final rule exempts the four heat pumps, and so is not in this action baseline of potential flow rates for a hydrocarbon refrigerants for the end- listing R441A as acceptable in these home or other public space, assuming uses addressed in the proposed rule uses at this time. flow rates of 2.5 and 4.5 air changes per from the venting prohibition under hour (ACH) (Sheldon, 1989). The Section 608. HFC–32 remains 2. Ethane highest concentrations of the refrigerant prohibited from being knowingly vented Comment: EIA supported the listing occur in the lower stratum of the room or otherwise knowingly released or of ethane as acceptable subject to use when assuming the lower ventilation disposed of by any person maintaining, conditions for use in very low level of 2.5 ACH. Calculating the TWA servicing, repairing, or disposing temperature refrigeration and non- exposure using 2.5 ACH results in a appliances containing HFC–32. mechanical heat transfer, and indicated higher concentration than calculating that equipment using ethane is available VI. What are EPA’s responses to public the TWA exposure using 4.5 ACH. Even that will reduce impacts on climate and comments? under the very conservative cut energy use. assumptions used in the consumer A. EPA’s Acceptability Determinations Response: EPA appreciates the exposure modeling, the estimated 15- support for listing ethane as acceptable minute or 30-minute consumer 1. R–441A subject to use conditions in very low exposures to the refrigerants are much Comment: The Environmental temperature refrigeration and non- lower than the relevant toxicity limits Investigation Agency-U.S. (EIA), an mechanical heat transfer. and thus should not pose a toxicity risk environmental organization, and A.S. Comment: Hoshizaki America, a any greater than that of other acceptable Trust & Holdings, the submitter for R– manufacturer of commercial refrigerants in the end-uses in this final 441A, supported the listing of R–441A refrigeration equipment, questioned the rule. Other acceptable refrigerants pose as an acceptable substitute in new test methods used to evaluate ethane’s similar toxicity risks. stand-alone retail food refrigeration flammability and fire safety. For further information, including equipment, residential and light Response: The commenter provided EPA’s risk screens and risk assessments commercial AC, and vending machines. no support for why they believed this as well as fault tree analyses from the EIA noted the climate benefits, was necessary or what, if anything else, submitters of the substitutes, see docket improved energy efficiency, and they question in the test methods used number EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0748 at reduced flammability for this to evaluate ethane. EPA evaluated www.regulations.gov. refrigerant. flammability risks in the risk screen Response: EPA agrees and thanks the included in the docket (Docket ID EPA– V. What are the differences between the commenters for their support of this HQ–OAR–2014–0748–0004). This proposed and final rules? listing decision. We are taking final evaluation followed the standard This final rule lists all five refrigerants action in this rule to list R–441A as approach for evaluating health and as acceptable, subject to use conditions, acceptable subject to use conditions for environmental risks that the SNAP in the same end-uses as in the proposed use in new retail food refrigerators and program has used over its 20-year rule. This final rule retains the same use freezers (stand-alone units only); new history. The results found worst-case conditions as proposed for very low residential and light commercial room leaks of ethane to result in temperature refrigeration equipment; AC units; and vending machines. concentrations far below the LFL of non-mechanical heat transfer Comment: A.S. Trust & Holdings 30,000 ppmv, showing a lack of equipment; retail food refrigeration, requested clarification as to whether flammability risk. We note that a use stand-alone equipment only; household EPA is approving the SNAP condition requires that the ethane- refrigerators, freezers, and combination applications (i.e., submissions) for R– containing equipment meet the refrigerator/freezers; and vending 441A in household window AC units, requirements of Supplement SB to the machines. vending machines, new commercial 10th edition of UL Standard 471 and For room AC units, EPA is retaining refrigerators, commercial freezers, and this use condition will ensure ethane the same use conditions as proposed, stand-alone refrigerated display cases, will be tested and will meet specific with one exception. For portable AC and new residential split-system AC safety testing requirements. units, EPA is not applying the proposed units, residential heat pumps, and charge limits for PTAC, PTHP, and other portable (floor) room air conditioners. 3. Isobutane floor mounted AC units, which are set Response: This final rule lists R–441A Comment: EIA and a private citizen forth in Table D. New Table E as acceptable, subject to use conditions, supported EPA’s proposal to list establishes charge limits for portable AC for use in (1) residential and light isobutane as acceptable subject to use units, consistent with the requirements commercial room AC units, (2) vending conditions for the proposed end-uses

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19473

and noted that it is already available subject to use conditions for use in room evaluates exposure and toxicity risks. In and in use in the United States and AC units. the End-Use Exposure Assessment the global markets in vending machines and EPA disagrees with the commenters modeled 15-minute and 30-minute in stand-alone retail food refrigeration who suggest that the toxicity, TWA exposures for consumers were equipment. Hoshizaki America flammability and GWP of HFC–32 well below the relevant short-term limit, questioned the listing of isobutane and indicate it should not be listed as the cardiotoxic NOAEL for HFC–32, for does not agree that it should be listed as acceptable, subject to use conditions, for all charge sizes. Based on the acceptable without proper safety use in room AC units. The GWP of Occupational Risk Assessment, analysis. HFC–32 (675) is two-thirds less than occupational exposure to HFC–32 is Response: EPA appreciates the that of the most commonly used anticipated to be significantly below the support for listing isobutane as alternative for this type of equipment, STEL during servicing and installation. acceptable subject to use conditions in R–410A (approximately 2,090) and also In addition, as discussed below in vending machines and stand-alone retail significantly lower than that of HCFC– section VI.G, ‘‘Venting prohibition,’’ food refrigeration equipment. EPA 22 (1,810) and R–407C (approximately EPA did not propose, nor is it finalizing, evaluated flammability risks in the risk 1,770). The only currently acceptable an exemption to the venting prohibition screens included in the docket (Docket alternatives in this end-use with lower for HFC–32. GWP include ammonia absorption and ID EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0748–0013 and 5. Propane -0021). The commenter that suggested the non-vapor compression technologies Comment: EIA supported listing isobutane should not be listed provided evaporative cooling and desiccant propane for use in all of EPA’s proposed no support for their statement and did cooling. However, there are technical limits on the effective use of the non- end-uses (household refrigerators and not explain what they meant by ‘‘proper freezers, vending machines, and room safety analysis.’’ EPA’s evaluations vapor compression technologies in different climates, and ammonia has a air conditioners), since hydrocarbons followed the standard approach for are already being used successfully in evaluating health and environmental higher toxicity that HFC–32 and the other alternatives. HFC–32 also has a these types of equipment around the risks that the SNAP program has used world. A private citizen agreed with the over its 20-year history. The results higher GWP than two other substitutes being listed in this end-use in this final listing of propane specifically for AC found leaks of isobutane in stand-alone units. Hozishaki America disagreed retail food refrigeration equipment and rule—propane (GWP of 3) and R–441A (GWP of less than 5). However, it is with the proposed listing of propane vending machines to result in considerably less flammable than either without proper safety analysis. concentrations far below the LFL of propane or R–441A. For example, HFC– Response: EPA appreciates the 30,000 ppmv, showing a lack of 32 has an LFL of 13.8% and a burning comments supporting our decision to flammability risk. We note that a use velocity of 6.7 cm/s compared to an LFL list propane as acceptable subject to use condition requires that retail food of 2.1% and a burning velocity of 46 conditions in the proposed end-uses refrigeration equipment using isobutane cm/s for propane and an LFL of 2.05% and agrees that hydrocarbons are meet the requirements of Supplement and a burning velocity of 47.6 cm/s for already being used safely and SB to the 10th edition of UL Standard R–441A (Daikin, 2011; A.S. Trust & successfully in such types of equipment 471 and that vending machines using Holdings, 2012). EPA’s risk screen on around the world. isobutane meet the requirements of the use of HFC–32 in residential and The commenter opposing listing of Supplement SA to the 7th edition of UL light commercial AC is available in the propane provided no support for their Standard 541. This use condition will docket for this rulemaking (Docket ID statements and did not explain what ensure isobutane is further tested in EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0748–0005). This they meant by ‘‘proper safety analysis.’’ equipment and will meet specific safety risk screen indicates that HFC–32’s LFL EPA’s evaluations followed the standard testing requirements. is not reached where the charge size is approach for evaluating health and 4. HFC–32 consistent with the use conditions, so environmental risks that the SNAP we do not expect a significant risk of program has used over its 20-year Comment: A.S. Trust & Holdings; fire. history. EPA performed risk screens on ComStar, a distributor of R–441A and The commenters did not provide any the use of propane in household other chemicals, and several private information concerning why they refrigerators and freezers, vending citizens expressed concerns with the believed that HFC–32 should be listed machines, and room air conditioners listing of HFC–32 as an acceptable as unacceptable based on its toxicity; which are available in the docket for substitute in room AC units due to its the commenters merely provided this rulemaking (Docket IDs EPA–HQ– toxicity, flammability, and high GWP general information such as Material OAR–2013–0748–0006, –0007, and relative to hydrocarbon refrigerants. Data Safety Sheets (MSDSs) without –0008). EPA’s vending machine risk These commenters said that HFC–32’s giving analysis specific to HFC–32. The screen indicates that propane’s LFL is higher GWP, in combination with its potential health effects listed in the not reached in the typical scenario, and flammability and other characteristics, MSDSs provided by the commenters, for room air conditioners and household is reason for not finding this substitute such as freeze burns, anesthetic effects, refrigerators and freezers, worst-case acceptable. Most of these commenters and asphyxia, are common to many concentrations would be well below were specifically concerned, due to the refrigerants already in the same end-use, propane’s LFL, showing a lack of GWP and toxicity of HFC–32, that EPA such as HCFC–22, R–410A, or HFC– flammability risk. We note that EPA is might exempt HFC–32 from the venting 134a. Further, these health effects apply including a use condition that requires prohibition. EIA and Daikin, the to both HFC–32 and to the two that household refrigerators and freezers submitter of HFC–32, supported listing hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes that using propane meet the requirements of HFC–32 as acceptable subject to use we are also listing in this action as Supplement SA to the 10th edition of conditions. acceptable, subject to use conditions, in UL Standard 250, that vending Response: EPA appreciates the this end-use, and the commenters did machines using propane meet the support from the commenters who not raise concerns for the health effects requirements of Supplement SA to the support listing HFC–32 as acceptable for those substitutes. EPA’s risk screen 7th edition of UL Standard 541, and that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19474 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

room air conditioners meet the alternatives will mitigate climate on stratospheric ozone depletion requirements of Supplement A and impacts from the end-uses addressed in (Ravishankara et al, 1994; 21 WMO, Appendices B through F of the 8th this rule. 2010). Thus, EPA considers the impact edition of UL Standard 484.20 of HFCs on the ozone layer to be 2. Energy Efficiency and Indirect Comment: Some commenters comparable to those of hydrocarbons. suggested that propane should be added Climate Impacts to the list of acceptable substitutes for Comment: CARB and EIA stated that 4. Local Air Quality Impacts the very low temperature refrigeration the use of low-GWP hydrocarbon Comment: Regarding the air quality end-use, particularly since it could be refrigerants also indirectly reduces GHG modeling using CMAQ, A.S. Trust & used with the same UL 471 Standard as emissions through decreased energy Holdings stated that that the assumption for commercial refrigeration equipment. use. In contrast, Master-Bilt Products, a of rapid transition to all hydrocarbon manufacturer of commercial Response: EPA did not receive a refrigerants (in Scenarios 1, 2, and 3) is refrigeration equipment, said that some submission and thus has not evaluated not a viable assumption, and disregards of the proposed alternatives have poor propane for the very low temperature simple market realities. CARB referred refrigeration end-use. EPA may consider energy efficiency. to Scenarios 1 through 3 as upper-bound it in a future rulemaking action. Response: EPA agrees with CARB and EIA that, based on the available maximums that are not expected to B. Environmental and Public Health information, the hydrocarbon occur. Impacts refrigerants may decrease energy use Response: In Scenarios 1, 2, and 3 of 1. GWP and Direct Climate Impacts and thereby reduce GHG emissions the air quality analysis (ICF, 2014a), isobutane or propylene were assumed to Comment: The Alliance for indirectly. Each submission provided be the only refrigerant used, Responsible Atmospheric Policy (the information showing reduced energy respectively, in (1) all refrigeration and Alliance), California’s Air Resources consumption when using the alternative air conditioning uses, (2) all Board (CARB), EIA, the Institute of refrigerants listed in this rule (Daikin, refrigeration and air conditioning uses Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI), and 2011; A.S. Trust & Holdings, 2012; A/S except for MVAC, or (3) all refrigeration private citizens stated that the proposed Vestfrost, 2012; CHEAA, 2013). and air conditioning uses except for list of substitutes is an important step However, we note that the specific MVAC and large commercial chillers. towards mitigating the industry’s energy benefits will depend on a EPA agrees that these scenarios are not environmental impact, specifically by number of factors other than the likely to occur. These scenarios were broadening availability of substitutes refrigerant, such as the design of the that would reduce GHG emissions from equipment and efforts made to fine-tune not intended to project what is likely to the refrigeration and AC sector. CARB the equipment once it is installed. happen in the market, but rather, to estimates that if the proposed low-GWP Master-Bilt did not submit any specific provide screening estimates to see if refrigerants replace the high-GWP HFCs information regarding energy efficiency there would be some level of refrigerant in the identified end-use sectors, and EPA is not aware of information emissions that could result in nationwide annual emissions of GHGs supporting a claim that any of the unacceptably high increases in ground- would be reduced by between 9 and 11 refrigerants being listed have poor level ozone. The modeling indicated million metric tons of carbon dioxide energy efficiency. that widespread use of isobutane, propane, R–441A, and other saturated equivalents (MMTCO2eq). CARB also 3. Ozone Depletion stated that while the reductions are a hydrocarbon refrigerants are not likely Comment: A private citizen stated modest three percent decrease from to result in significant increases in that ‘‘hydrofluorocarbon refrigerants current fluorinated gas emissions, they ground-level ozone concentrations. In and CHFC [sic] refrigerants all have believe the proposal is an important contrast, the screening estimates in significant, demonstrated negative step in mitigating the anticipated Scenarios 1, 2, and 3 indicated that impacts on our atmospheric ozone, growth in emissions of HFCs. there could be significant increases in Response: EPA agrees that listing while hydrocarbons have no effect on ground-level ozone concentrations if use these five substitutes as acceptable stratospheric ozone depletion.’’ The (and emissions) of propylene were subject to use conditions in the commenter also stated that ‘‘[i]t is widespread. Thus, further analysis of specified end-uses is an important step accepted fact that these synthetic potential air quality impacts based on towards mitigating GHG emissions and fluorinated gases including HFC–32 likely use of propylene in the market the anticipated growth in emissions of rapidly accumulate in the atmosphere may be needed for evaluating propylene HFCs. We thank the commenter for the destroying ozone by breaking molecular or refrigerants containing propylene in calculated estimate of the potential bonds of O3’’ and requested that EPA any future action in which EPA environmental benefits associated with remove HFC–32 from the rule. considers listing propylene for these this rule. We do not know if the market Response: The role of HCFCs in ozone end-uses. depletion is well-documented (WMO, penetration for these newly-listed Comment: A.S. Trust & Holdings 2010) and these substances are in the alternatives will align with the commented that the air quality process of being phased out of assumptions used by CARB in modeling focuses on only one year production and consumption globally in developing their estimates. However, we (2005) of meteorological data. The steps. EPA agrees that hydrocarbons do agree that the entrance of these commenter stated it is standard practice not contribute to stratospheric ozone alternatives into the market and the in ambient air modeling studies to focus depletion. However, we disagree with decrease in use of higher GWP on typically five years of meteorological the commenter’s statement that HFC data to provide a more representative 20 refrigerants have significant, Similarly, EPA previously listed propane as sample of conditions on different days acceptable, subject to use conditions, in stand-alone demonstrated negative impact on retail food refrigeration equipment, including a atmospheric ozone or that they break 21 condition requiring that such equipment meet the molecular bonds of ozone. On the Ravishankara, A. R., A. A. Turnipseed, N. R. requirements of Supplement SB to the 10th edition Jensen, S. Barone, M. Mills, C. J. Howard, and S. of UL Standard 471. December 20, 2011; 76 FR contrary, HFCs have long been Solomon. 1994. Do hydrofluorocarbons destroy 78832. considered to have a negligible impact stratospheric ozone? Science 263: 71–75.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19475

and thus reduce the uncertainties in the and 3. We are listing a number of testing companies such as UL, the analysis. refrigerants as acceptable, subject to use Canadian Standards Association, and Response: It is standard practice to conditions, in several end-uses and we Intertek; and updating building codes to use five years of meteorological data in expect that they all will be present in allow for toxic refrigerants. regulatory analyses where the the market and in the atmosphere at the Response: EPA recognizes that steps assessment is for a single facility or same time. The interactions of the by industry and government such as small group of facilities seeking an air different compounds in the atmosphere physical upgrades to equipment quality permit, such as a permit for are interdependent and are not linear. manufacturer facilities, capital prevention of significant deterioration, Modeling each refrigerant separately investments, technician training, third- authority to construct, or air would result in a less realistic, and for party testing of equipment, and contaminant discharge. However, in some refrigerants an unrealistically low, revisions to building codes may be state implementation plans or estimate of environmental impacts. The needed before manufacturers of nationwide regulatory impact current air quality analysis found that refrigeration equipment and their assessments where an entire state or the the peak 8-hr ozone increase of 0.15 ppb customers will be able to adopt the continental United States is modeled, a for Los Angeles is about 75% associated refrigerants listed in this final rule. We full ozone season or a single year of with the use of propylene as a also recognize that finalizing this rule meteorology is generally considered refrigerant and 21% from propane under removes regulatory uncertainty about sufficient (EPA, 2007). In the case of the Scenario 4 (ICF, 2014a, p. 10). EPA’s requirements for use of these CMAQ analysis performed for this rule, refrigerants in the listed end-uses, modeling was performed based upon 5. Trifluoroacetic Acid another required step before these refrigerant emissions from the entire Comment: The Australian refrigerants will be adopted. United States and thus, use of one year Refrigeration Association (ARA) stated Concerning toxicity of the proposed of meteorological data was appropriate. that the toxic buildup of trifluoroacetic refrigerants, our risk screens find that Comment: A.S. Trust & Holdings acid (TFA) (which they claimed is a even a worst-case release of isobutane or noted that specific hydrocarbon byproduct of HFC–32 decomposition) in R–441A from stand-alone retail food refrigerants were not separately fragile eco-systems is not reversible. refrigeration equipment will not result modeled in the air quality model. This This commenter also stated that if TFA in exceeding exposure limits such as the commenter states that each refrigerant levels are allowed to build up until TLVs of 1,000 ppm for isobutane or for should be assessed separately by the algae and plant life is destroyed, it will the four components of R–441A or the Agency and that it does not seem be too late to prevent the collapse of the relevant short-term exposure limits for reasonable to regulate a single food chain and global catastrophe. The these compounds. Similarly, for refrigerant based on a whole family of same commenter also noted that even propane in household refrigerators and refrigerants. This commenter also stated before catastrophic levels are reached, freezers, a worst-case release would not that it is difficult to make any crop yields and marine life will be exceed exposure limits such as the substantial conclusions regarding adversely affected. AEGL–1 of 6,900 ppm for propane. For propylene without assessing the more Response: Available information vending machines, propane, isobutane, realistic Scenario 4. CARB stated that indicates that TFA is not a byproduct of and the components of R–441A do not Scenario 4 of the analysis is a good the decomposition of HFC–32 exceed exposure limits in the typical representation of anticipated emissions (Wellington and Nielsen, 1999, as cited scenario, such as the AEGL–1 of 6,900 and useful for assessing the potential in ICF, 2015a). We note that even if TFA ppm for propane. We found similar ozone impacts of the proposal. This were a minimal byproduct of HFC–32, results for the other types of equipment commenter also stated that the small HFC–32 would not pose significantly in this rule, as discussed above in estimated impact based on national greater risk than other available Section IV.C, ‘‘Toxicity and modeling is consistent with its own substitutes because TFA is generated by asphyxiation.’’ Thus, the refrigerants estimate of the magnitude of potential some other acceptable substitutes used that we are finding acceptable subject to emission increases and the lower ozone in the same end-uses as in this rule. use conditions present comparable formation potential of the hydrocarbon toxicity risk to other acceptable refrigerants. C. Toxicity refrigerants already used in these end- Response: Scenario 4 is a scenario uses. 1. Toxicity of Proposed Refrigerants that analyzed potential air quality Comment: A private citizen stated impacts of hydrocarbon refrigerants in a Comment: Master-Bilt Products stated that EPA should confirm there is no set of end-uses that would be more that the non-drop-in alternatives health threat to society before approving likely to use hydrocarbon refrigerants available and proposed by EPA have this rule. between now and 2030. These included many negative characteristics including Response: EPA has assessed risks to end-uses for which UL currently has toxicity. The commenter stated that as a human health and the environment— standards in place, for which the SNAP result, much more testing is going to be including the flammability and toxicity, program has already listed hydrocarbon required now than was required with considering exposure to workers, refrigerants as acceptable, subject to use the switch from CFCs to HFCs. This consumers, and the general public of conditions, or for which the SNAP commenter stated that before these each substitute listed in this final rule. program is reviewing a submission, newly redesigned products can be sold, In addition, we have evaluated the including those end-uses addressed in many additional steps will need to take environmental impacts, including this final rule. EPA agrees with the place, such as upgrading appliance potential increases in generation of second commenter that this scenario is manufacturing facilities; training service ground-level ozone, impacts on the useful for assessing the potential ozone technicians in using toxic refrigerants; ozone layer and global climate, all of impacts of the proposal. achieving customer acceptance of which can impact human health. Based We disagree with the first commenter having toxic refrigerants in their on these assessments, we have that EPA should have assessed each facilities, near their employees and determined that the human health risks refrigerant separately in Scenario 4 as customers, and around their food of the listed refrigerants are comparable we did in the bounding Scenarios 1, 2, products; an expansion in capacity of to or less than those from other

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19476 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

acceptable refrigerants in the same end- concrete evidence that there is no ensure the substitutes can be used as uses. significant risk for this use. This safely as other available substitutes. commenter specifically questioned the EPA believes that complying with the 2. Toxicity of Decomposition Products test method used for the flammability use conditions listed in this final action, of HFC–32 and fire safety for isobutane and ethane as well as with use conditions listed in Comment: ARA and A.S. Trust & and disagreed with the listing of previous SNAP rules, reduces overall Holdings expressed concern about the isobutane or propane without proper risk to human health and the potential for HFC–32 to decompose into safety analysis. environment. These use conditions will hydrogen fluoride (HF), carbonyl Response: EPA agrees that ensure the substitutes are further tested fluoride, and other toxic chemicals flammability is an important in equipment and will meet specific because it is a fluorocarbon refrigerant. consideration with regard to substitutes safety testing requirements. A.S. Trust & Holdings suggested that evaluated in this rulemaking. EPA EPA believes that (1) these HFC–32 should not be acceptable evaluated the safety of these refrigerants evaluations have followed standard because of the toxicity of its prior to issuing the proposal for this SNAP methods and showed low risk, (2) decomposition products. rule. EPA believes flammability risks our decisions rely on consensus-based Response: EPA disagrees that the can be mitigated to ensure the safety standards developed specifically potential for toxic decomposition substitutes can be used as safely as other to test and to assure safe use of products from HFC–32, when used available substitutes in these uses. EPA flammable refrigerants, and (3) the consistent with the established use also notes that more than 400 million required use conditions reduce the conditions, creates a risk more hydrocarbon refrigerators are in use flammability risk associated with the significant than the risks posed by other worldwide, as well as millions of listed substitutes. For these reasons, available refrigerants in the same end- these alternatives provide lower overall smaller residential air conditioners uses. The risks of decomposition risk to human health and the using hydrocarbons or HFC–32. Reports products from HFC–32 in room air environment than other available or of refrigerator ignition incidents conditioners are no greater than that potentially available alternatives in very resulting from leaked hydrocarbons from currently used refrigerants such as low temperature refrigeration have been rare. To determine whether HCFC–22 or R–410A, all of which equipment, non-mechanical heat the refrigerants would present contain fluorine. Indeed, the most transfer, retail food refrigeration flammability concerns for consumers or commonly used acceptable alternative equipment (stand-alone units only), for workers, including those servicing or refrigerant for room air conditioners, R– vending machines, room air disposing of appliances. EPA reviewed 410A, is a blend that contains 50% conditioners and household HFC–32. the submitters’ detailed assessments of refrigerators and freezers. In response to It is true that hydrocarbon refrigerants the probability of events that might the comment requesting EPA to do not contain fluorine and thus do not create a fire, as well as engineering ‘‘evaluate the safety and enforcement have the potential for the same toxic approaches to avoid sparking from the issues that must be addressed before byproducts such as HF or carbonyl refrigerant equipment. EPA also flammable refrigerants are ubiquitous in fluoride. However, the risk of generating conducted risk screens, available in the the marketplace,’’ we note that the HF only exists when HFC–32 burns. docket for this rulemaking, evaluating commenter did not elaborate on what it Even in the worst-case scenario in our reasonable worst-case and more typical, meant regarding ‘‘enforcement issues.’’ risk screen for use of HFC–32 in room yet conservative, scenarios to model the We considered compliance concerns as AC units, the concentration of HFC–32 effects of the sudden release of the we developed the proposed and final would not exceed 69% of the LFL. refrigerants. This final rule establishes rule. For example, EPA notes elsewhere Therefore, the flammability risks of maximum charge sizes for each type of in this final rule that placing the HFC–32, and the related potential to equipment, and analysis for each of the responsibility on the manufacturer to generate HF are extremely low. Based substitutes revealed that even if the design equipment that restricts the on analysis of all of the relevant health unit’s full charge were emitted within maximum refrigerant charge based upon and environmental factors, EPA one minute, the concentration would the cooling capacity needed provides a concluded that HFC–32 does not not reach the LFL for that refrigerant. better means for EPA to ensure present a significantly higher risk to The listings of ethane, HFC–32, compliance with the use conditions and human health or the environment than isobutane, propane, and R–441A as thus to ensure that the risk to human other currently or potentially available acceptable, subject to use conditions, health will not be greater than that substitutes in the room AC end-use. will allow manufacturers to develop posed by other available substitutes. equipment that will use these Comment: Several commenters noted D. Flammability substitutes as refrigerants. It is not the flammability of HFC–32. A.S. Trust Comment: Traulsen, a manufacturer necessary for EPA to pre-test the actual & Holdings indicated surprise at the of commercial refrigeration equipment, equipment as part of its threshold charge size allowed for HFC–32, as and Hoshizaki America, believed there analysis of whether refrigerants, used provided in the proposed use has been an incomplete safety consistent with the use conditions, will conditions, given its flammability. ARA assessment for listing flammable pose a flammability risk of concern. In states that HFC–32 is extremely substitutes as acceptable. The North addition, we note that the use flammable and notes the high ignition American Association of Food conditions required by this rule include temperature of HFC–32. ComStar Equipment Manufacturers (NAFEM) testing requirements in the relevant UL believes HFC–32’s flammability, and requested that the Agency reevaluate the standards which are intended, among proposed high refrigerant charges in safety and enforcement issues that must other things, to ensure that any leaks indoor systems, are compelling reasons be addressed before flammable will result in concentrations well below to keep HFC–32 out of all indoor refrigerants are ubiquitous in the the LFL, and that potential ignition refrigerant applications. marketplace. Hoshizaki America sources will not be able to create Response: As discussed above in requested further testing and analysis on temperatures high enough to start a fire. section VI.A.4, HFC–32 is significantly actual machines to provide more EPA believes risks can be mitigated to less flammable than the other

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19477

refrigerants considered in this example, EPA would expect private risk screens for each refrigerant and rulemaking for use in room AC sector investments in safety upgrades end-use (ICF, 2014b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k). equipment. The charge sizes are similar to those made when we listed These would assist the owner in calculated using the same formulas from certain hydrocarbon refrigerants planning for situations where there is a UL 484 as those for propane and R– previously for household refrigerators leak of flammable refrigerant but no 441A. The charge size is larger for HFC– and freezers and stand-alone retail food trained technician is available. For retail 32 because it has a much higher (safer) refrigeration equipment. In addition, food refrigeration equipment and very LFL. manufacturers would need to invest in low temperature refrigeration Comment: Enertech Global, a training their staff in safe handling of equipment, such plans could include manufacturer of heat pumps, noted that flammable refrigerants, including how training staff to recognize signs of leaks one disadvantage of hydrocarbon to recognize ignition sources. For (e.g., odors, sounds, reduced cooling refrigerants is their flammability. example, technicians need to be aware ability, and alarm signals where there is However, the commenter believes that that standard refrigerant recovery leak monitoring equipment) and to careful design, manufacturing, and use equipment manufactured for non- actively seek steps to remove or avoid can ensure ‘‘safe operation and handling flammable refrigerants should not be ignition sources (e.g., post signs in every step of the value chain.’’ Daikin used for recovering flammable prohibiting smoking or open flames, has sold approximately three million refrigerants, because even though it avoid plugging in or unplugging units worldwide and indicated that it is technically is capable of recovering electrical equipment when a leak is unaware of any incidents where the many of these hydrocarbons at similar suspected). For household appliances, refrigerant ignited during installation, pressure levels, such equipment may consumers would have guidance servicing, or removal of these systems. lack adequate explosion proofing or provided by the equipment Additionally, the commenter stated that non-sparking parts. Further, they need manufacturer in the owner’s manual. In in Sweden, more than 100,000 packaged to be aware that plugging or unplugging addition, we note that the use heat pumps that use flammable either the refrigeration and AC conditions provide additional safety refrigerants have been used in safe equipment or electrical refrigerant measures that make equipment owners, operation for over two decades. Daikin recovery equipment is an ignition consumers, and emergency first noted that service technician training source. In addition, we note that many responders aware of the presence of a materials already developed could of the use conditions, such as the flammability risk and that minimize the reduce flammability risks associated labeling and colored hoses, are for the risk that refrigerant concentrations with hydrocarbon refrigerants. express purpose of ensuring that would reach flammable or explosive Response: EPA agrees that the technicians are aware that the levels. flammability risks of concern with refrigerant is flammable. Comment: NAFEM noted that some hydrocarbon refrigerants can be Second, EPA believes that greater local building and fire safety codes still adequately managed through proper awareness of the presence, risks, and do not allow even small quantities of design, controls, and use conditions. benefits of flammable refrigerants flammable refrigerants and that EPA also believes that service among consumers, industry code- and manufacturers will be forced to technician training materials will help standard-setting organizations, fire maintain their current use of R–134a provide protection and minimize risks marshals, and first responders will lead and R–404A until states and associated with hydrocarbon to a smoother, safer transition to municipalities update their codes. refrigerants. The safe operating history flammable refrigerants. EPA is working Traulsen believed that all issues of millions of HFC–32 AC units and with standards setting organizations regarding codes, standards, safe more than 100,000 packaged heat such as UL and ASHRAE and with handling and venting can and should be pumps that use flammable refrigerants technician certifying organizations to resolved before the option to switch to is encouraging. improve the level of knowledge of a flammable refrigerant is the only Comment: NAFEM, ICOR technicians. EPA also intends to update choice available to a manufacturer or International (ICOR), Traulsen, and the test bank for technician certification equipment purchaser. Hoshizaki America expressed various under Section 608 of the CAA, and Response: This current rule expands other concerns regarding the could include additional questions on rather than limits the refrigerant choices flammability of proposed substitutes in the safe handling of flammable available in each of the proposed end- the heating, ventilation, air conditioning refrigerants. EPA will seek additional uses; thus, no one is restricted to using and refrigeration (HVACR) industry information and guidance on how best a flammable refrigerant in those end- including: the capital costs associated to incorporate this content through a uses. There are multiple acceptable with using flammable refrigerants; the separate process outside of this rule. nonflammable refrigerants available for need to redesign equipment; the lack of Comment: NAFEM and ICOR use in these end-uses. Government and awareness and training for service expressed concern about what to do industry cooperation, such as the task personnel and consumers; the need for when a leak occurs and a trained force formed to examine and work proper technician training; and industry technician is not present. NAFEM towards updating building codes to codes and standards. NAFEM and ICOR suggested that EPA should consider allow use of alternative refrigerants, has expressed concerns for the technicians other foreseeable conditions in which begun to address barriers to revising being able to recognize potential flammable refrigerants are used, and building codes. However, in the absence ignition sources. specify precautionary measures in of any flammable refrigerant being Response: Refrigeration and AC situations such as a leak where no acceptable for use, government and equipment manufacturers are not trained technician is present. other code-setting bodies may not have required to use any of the flammable Response: We expect that owners of an incentive to revise codes to address refrigerants listed as acceptable subject this kind of equipment will follow the the use of flammable refrigerants. EPA to use conditions in this action; we manufacturer’s recommendations for supports the concept of a national expect that those who choose to do so safe use and, for retail food refrigeration training program for flammable will make appropriate capital and other commercial equipment, refrigerants and welcomes industry investments in their facilities. For OSHA requirements, as discussed in our efforts to educate technicians on proper

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19478 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

refrigerant use and proper service and stand-alone refrigeration equipment unit’s cooling capacity, as specified in disposal practices, including safe such as stand-alone retail food Table A, B, C, or D of this appendix.’’]. handling and venting. refrigeration equipment, very low The commenters note that they expect Comment: NAFEM is concerned the temperature refrigeration equipment, the next revision to UL 484 to be rulemaking will result in danger to the and household refrigerators, freezers, published by the end of 2014 or early public as flammable refrigerants are and combination refrigerator/freezers. 2015. forced into certain market applications. We note that for purposes of our review, Response: EPA understands that the Response: This rule does not require we consider each end-use separately. consensus-based standards that are the the use of flammable refrigerants; other, basis of the use conditions in the non-flammable refrigerants remain E. Use Conditions proposed rule are under review and may available for use in each of the end-uses 1. New Equipment Only; Not Intended change in the future. This is true for all addressed in this action. Further, as for Use a Retrofit Alternative standards controlled by an active discussed in the proposed rule and organization such as UL. EPA does not elsewhere in the preamble to the final Comment: Traulsen, ISRI, and believe that it would be appropriate to rule, this action requires that when the Hudson Technologies, a refrigerant adopt use conditions to reflect standards listed flammable refrigerants are used in reclaimer, supported limiting the use of that are not yet final and may still be the specific end-uses, they will be used the substitutes to new equipment. subject to change. EPA believes the under specific conditions that will Response: EPA appreciates the consensus-based standards it relied mitigate the flammability risks. support for our proposal to establish use upon are protective of human health, Comment: Hoshizaki America conditions to limit the use of the rest upon sound science and reflect the requested that refrigerants used in the substitutes to new equipment only and currently used and accepted guidelines commercial refrigeration sector be from agrees with the commenters. EPA is in the appliance industry. Our risk the A1 group. The commenter noted including this use condition in this final screens found that equipment that met that refrigerant manufacturers are in the action. EPA’s proposed charge limits based on phase of gaining approval of 2. Compliance With UL Standards the current, 8th Edition of UL 484 did nonflammable refrigerants that have low not exceed the LFL or exposure limits GWPs. The commenter claims that these Comment: AHRI, DuPont, and GE for each of the three refrigerants refrigerants would be near drop-in Appliances stated that the UL 484 proposed for use in room AC units, even replacements with added efficiency Standard (for room AC units) is being in relatively small spaces. If UL 484 is benefits. Structural Concepts, a revised to match the fourth edition of revised in the future, or if other manufacturer of commercial IEC 60335–2–40, and that these information becomes available that refrigeration equipment, requested EPA revisions will likely include a reduced would support a change in charge size to approve R–448A, R–449A, and R– allowable charge level for flammable limits, particularly to address specific 450A (nonflammable refrigerant blends refrigerants. According to the risks, EPA remains open to revising the of HFOs and HFCs) for the stand-alone, commenters, this reduction was charge size use condition and/or the supermarket, and condensing unit end- determined to be necessary for safe use specific edition of the UL standard, uses. by a group of U.S. experts. The new whether in response to a petition or in Response: There are multiple non- limit is determined by the equation an action initiated by EPA. flammable A1 refrigerants listed as ‘‘Charge limit = 3 m3 × LFL, where LFL Furthermore, the commenters did not acceptable for commercial refrigeration is the lower flammable limit in kg/m3 provide any technical support for the (retail food refrigeration and vending for the refrigerant used.’’ The changes they anticipate will be made to machines), including CO2 and, as commenters noted that the charge level the UL 484 Standard, nor do they mentioned by the commenter, R–450A, is small enough that restriction based on provide information demonstrating that a non-flammable refrigerant blend that room size is not necessary. As such, the the charge sizes we proposed present performs very similarly to HFC–134a commenters recommended that EPA unacceptable risks. We also note that but with a lower GWP. As of the writing modify the methodology used to while the commenters suggest that the of this final rule, EPA was still determine maximum charge level and charge size they anticipate will be reviewing submissions for R–448A and revise the 3rd paragraph of use included in a revision to the UL 484 R–449A. conditions as follows: Standard will be small enough that no Comment: Hoshizaki America noted ‘‘The charge size for the entire air restrictions based on room size would that stand-alone refrigeration equipment conditioner must not exceed the be needed, our understanding is that the is well-known for having low maximum refrigerant mass determined current UL 484 standard includes probability of field leaks as leaks in according to Appendix F of UL 484, 8th formulas for charge limits based upon a such equipment would prevent the edition for the room size where the air peer-reviewed study (Kataoka et al., equipment from maintaining safe conditioner is used. The charge size for 2000) and the IEC 60335–2–40 Standard temperature for food. Due to low these three refrigerants must in no case (EPA, 2015). probability of leaks, the commenter exceed 918 g (32.4 oz or 2.02 lb) of By relying on the existing UL believes the evaluation of commercial HFC–32; 114 g (4.0 oz or 0.25 lbs) of standard, EPA remains consistent with refrigeration products should be propane; or 123 g (4.3 oz or 0.27 lb) of our approach in listing other flammable considered separate from other fields R–441A..’’ [The previous sentence is in refrigerants acceptable, subject to use which exhibit larger leakage to the place of the proposed statements, ‘‘The conditions, including charge size limits atmosphere. charge size for these three refrigerants (76 FR 78832; December 20, 2011) as set Response: EPA agrees that stand-alone must in no case exceed 7960 g (280.8 oz forth in the applicable UL standards at refrigeration equipment is less likely to or 17.55 lb) of HFC–32; 1000 g (35.3 oz the time of our final listing action. leak than other types of refrigeration or 2.21 lb) of propane; or 1000 g (35.3 We believe that reliance on current equipment, such as remote systems. oz or 2.21 lb) of R–441A. The standards, developed with a focus on This final rule lists a number of manufacturer must design a charge size U.S. products and applications, are flammable refrigerants acceptable, for the entire air conditioner that does more appropriate than potential future subject to use conditions, for use in not exceed the amount specified for the standards that have not yet been

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19479

adopted. We believe reliance on existing installations, and the EPA footnote 10, the District of Columbia. The entry points for standards provides certainty for which indicates that no ducts can be which the product is introduced into manufacturers, while reducing the used for PTACs using HFC–32. This interstate commerce are the release of a flammability risks that may exist due to product from the facility in which the commenter believes that the UL 484 product was manufactured, the entry into a use of the flammable refrigerants listed standard should be followed, as ducts warehouse from which the domestic in this action. While charge size limits present no additional fire risk in manufacturer releases the product for sale or may change in the future, EPA cannot systems with hermetically sealed distribution, and at the site of United States anticipate the timing or extent of such refrigerant loops. Customs clearance. This definition applies to changes. Response: EPA agrees with the any appliances produced in the United Should a manufacturer seek UL commenter that UL 484 does allow for States, including appliances that will be approval of their equipment in a limited ducts in PTAC installations, exported. (76 FR 78846) possible future where the standard has contrary to footnote 10 in the preamble The commenter has provided no new changed, they would need to meet both to the proposal. In this final action, we information that would cause us to the use conditions EPA has finalized are clarifying by correcting that footnote reverse our earlier decision. today and meet the presumably more to be consistent with the 8th edition of We believe that compliance with restrictive requirements of the UL the UL 484 standard by removing the these final use conditions, including the standard applicable at the time they are statement about ducts. specified UL standards and charge sizes, seeking UL approval. We also note that Comment: Traulsen recommends that does not restrict or prohibit should a manufacturer choose to adopt EPA consider that equipment being manufacturers from exporting to other one of the refrigerants covered by manufactured specifically for markets markets. For most of the uses addressed today’s action, they must decide what outside the United States is governed by in this rule, international standards charge size they will design their the applicable standards and guidelines regarding charge size are the same as equipment for and may choose any of those countries. The commenter those we are establishing in the use charge size equal to or below the states that the proposed use conditions conditions. maximums set under today’s action. would restrict a manufacturer’s ability In the case of household refrigerators Comment: The Association of Home to place a product on the market in and freezers, the charge size Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) and another country. The commenter requirement in our regulation is more the Alliance stated that EPA should encourages the EPA to allow flexibility stringent (57 g vs. 150 g) than the work towards a harmonized for products to be sold into global comparable international standard. Even international standard. UL noted their markets, providing that such equipment in this case, however, the use condition organization’s work towards is clearly marked for export purposes would not restrict or prohibit the export harmonizing standards through the only. For example, Traulsen requested of products to international markets. introduction of the UL 60335–2–40 that equipment manufactured Rather, the manufacturers could export Standard. This commenter suggested exclusively for export only be subject to products so long as they complied with that EPA allow compliance with both the charge sizes in regulations all of the use restrictions, including the the UL 484 and the UL 60335–2–40 applicable to the destination country. charge size of no more than 57 g. Standards. UL also clarified that the UL Response: Under Section 612 of the 3. Charge Size Limitations 484 Standard will eventually be CAA and EPA’s implementing withdrawn and replaced with the UL Comment: EIA stated that the propane regulations in Subpart G of 40 CFR part charge limit size of 57 g for household 60335–2–40 Standard, possibly in 2020. 82, the SNAP program is applicable to Response: EPA appreciates refrigerators and freezers, set by the UL any person introducing a substitute into information regarding efforts that may 250 standards, should be increased to interstate commerce. This applies to the result in the withdrawal of UL 484 and 150 grams, matching the IEC 60335–2– introduction into interstate commerce of its being replaced by UL 60335–2–40 24 standards. The commenter notes that any appliances produced in the United perhaps by 2020. As provided in the this is consistent with European previous response, however, EPA States, including appliances that will be policies, and corresponds to an R–22 believes it is appropriate to rely on the exported. EPA has previously charge size of 300–350 grams. existing UL 484 Standard in this final responded to comments about the Response: As discussed in our rule. If UL 484 is replaced with UL applicability of the SNAP program to previous final rule that required a 60335–2–40 in the future or is otherwise products destined for export. Most charge size of 57 g for R–441A and modified, EPA remains open to revising recently, in a final rule issued December isobutane in household refrigerators and the use condition, whether in response 20, 2011, EPA responded to a comment freezers, ‘‘EPA does not have sufficient to a petition or in an action initiated by concerning whether appliances information supported by safety testing EPA. Regarding the comment that the manufactured for export should be data at this time from other commenters, use condition allows compliance with allowed to have larger charge sizes than industry, U.S. national safety either UL 484 or UL 60335–2–40, we those being sold in the United States organizations, or non-governmental note that today there are some (and thus not have to comply with the organizations to support a charge size differences in labeling requirements and use conditions being established in that limit different from one based on UL in the specific tests to be performed that rule). EPA stated that: 250, such as the 150-gram limit in IEC could lead to confusion and difficulty in Under Section 612 of the Clean Air Act, the 60335–2–24.’’ (76 FR 78845; December enforcing requirements of two standards SNAP program is applicable to any person 20, 2011). Further, our risk screen simultaneously. Moreover, as noted in introducing a substitute into interstate analysis of potential exposure at end- our previous response, EPA’s consistent commerce. Interstate commerce is defined in use for a household refrigerator/freezer 40 CFR 82.104(n) as: The distribution or indicates that in a worst-case release practice for flammable refrigerants has transportation of any product between one been to base the use conditions on the state, territory, possession or the District of scenario, a charge as small as 104 g applicable UL standard. Columbia, and another state, territory, could result in consumer exposure Comment: Daikin notes a discrepancy possession or the District of Columbia, or the above the STEL of 6,900 ppm for between UL 484, which allows for sale, use or manufacture of any product in propane (ICF, 2014h). The commenter limited ducts used in PTAC more than one state, territory, possession or did not submit any technical

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19480 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

information showing that a charge size substitutes, not on the feasibility of Comment: ComStar opposed the use of 150 g could be used in this end-use manufacturing specific products. The of HFC–32 as a refrigerant in indoor without posing a significantly greater charge sizes in the proposed and final applications because of its proposed risk than other available substitutes. rule are based upon the UL 484 high charges, as well as its toxicity, Comment: UL believes that the Standard, 8th Edition. For portable AC flammability, and GWP over 600. The lowered charge limits suggested by the units, the use condition establishing commenter remarked that the use of R– Joint Task Group (JTG) and Standards charge size relies on the provisions of 32 in indoor applications is counter to Technical Panels (STP) from the 2011 UL 484 Appendix F Clauses F.1.7– ‘‘the direction foreign governments, Flammable Refrigerant Stakeholder F.1.14. Clause F.1.7 allows non-fixed, science, and OEMs are heading.’’ Forum are especially important for factory-sealed units, which for purposes Response: Charge sizes are higher for safety in room AC units, given that of this rule we define solely as portable HFC–32 under this standard than for many room air conditioners are room AC units, to follow the formula: propane or R–441A, the other removed from wall or window sleeves refrigerants proposed for use in room air M = 0.25 × A × LFL × 2.2 annually and placed in storage, max conditioners, because HFC–32 is far less potentially increasing the risk of Where, flammable and has a much higher LFL. ignition in the presence of flammable Mmax is the maximum charge size in kg, Based on the safety testing available in A is the room area in m2 and refrigerants. 3 the record for this action, we believe Response: EPA recognizes that many LFL is the lower flammability limit in kg/m . that meeting a charge size that is no room air conditioners are removed and The formula applies only to units higher than that provided in the use placed in storage, for example when with a refrigerant charge M that is less conditions, HFC–32 does not pose changing from warmer, summer than or equal to twice the value of ‘‘m1,’’ significantly greater risk than other temperatures to colder, winter which in turn is defined as four cubic refrigerants in the room air condition temperatures. This fact was understood meters multiplied by the LFL in kg/m3. end-use. This testing addressed when the current charge limits set in UL Similar to the use-conditions set forth flammability and toxicity risks. 484 were developed. While we for other room air-conditioners, EPA is Moreover, HFC–32’s GWP of 675 is two- recognize that an annual removal/ setting additional charge size limits thirds less than that of the most replacement cycle could increase the according to the normal rated capacity commonly used alternative for this type risk that refrigerants in such products of the unit. For portable room air of equipment, R–410A (approximately might leak, we are not aware of, nor did conditioners, these maximum charge 2,090) and also significantly lower than we receive comments providing a safety sizes in terms of capacity are in Table that of HCFC–22 (1,810) and R–407C assessment that would give an E (also described above in Section (approximately 1,770). The only analytical basis on which to set charge III.C.3, ‘‘Charge size’’). currently acceptable alternatives in this size limits different than those end-use with lower GWP include Comment: Daikin stated that the proposed. EPA does not believe that the ammonia absorption and the non-vapor charge limits in UL Standard 484 are commenter fully justified the need or compression technologies evaporative sufficient to protect the safety of all reason to change our proposed charge cooling and desiccant cooling. However, involved in the use and maintenance of size limit, which are based on the there are technical limits on the relevant equipment, and that any further existing UL 484 Standard (8th edition), effective use of the non-vapor limitations would cause the commenter to a charge size recommended by the compression technologies in different ‘‘to revisit EPA’s justifications for any JTG and STP, but not yet formally climates, and ammonia has a higher adopted. R–32 charge size limits.’’ The toxicity that HFC–32 and the other Comment: Enertech Global believes commenter agreed with the guidance to alternatives. that the proposed charge limitations for use linear interpolation to determine Regarding the direction of foreign propane found in Table 4, Maximum maximum charge size if the capacity lies governments, we note that EPA is Design Charge Sizes for Packaged between two values in EPA’s tables and setting requirements for appliances that Terminal AC Units and Heat Pumps and believes that it would not be beneficial enter interstate commerce in the United Portable AC Units, are set too low and to add any more values to the tables. States. The European Union (EU) that it is not feasible to manufacture a The commenter also states that a regulations addressing fluorinated unit with the specified cooling capacity requirement for manufacturers to match substances allow use of refrigerants with using the small refrigerant charges charge size to design cooling capacity in a GWP of up to 750 for split residential listed. De’ Longhi, another manufacturer flammable refrigerant systems would AC, which includes the potential for of AC equipment, stated that under not significantly reduce fire risk. HFC–32 to be used, while their relevant standards, there is a specific Response: EPA is finalizing charge regulations do not allow for refrigerants formula with higher charges allowed for size limits for room air conditioners as with a GWP higher than 150 in portable AC units in IEC 60335–2–40 proposed, including a linear ‘‘moveable room air-conditioning Clause gg.8 and UL 484 Appendix F interpolation, as supported by this appliances,’’ which would exclude Clause F.1.7 (e.g., 300 g for a capacity commenter. EPA notes in its response to HFC–32 for that type of equipment. The of 12,000 BTU/hr instead of 160 g under other commenters that if and when EU regulations also include a the proposal). This commenter states charge sizes are updated, EPA remains phasedown schedule with a plateau and that there are additional safety open to revising the charge size use not a complete phaseout of HFCs. Thus, requirements specifically for portable condition, whether in response to a it does not appear that the EU F-gas AC units that allow for larger charge petition or in an action initiated by EPA. regulations are moving in a direction sizes. EPA also believes that the use condition away from allowing for HFC–32 for all Response: EPA is establishing a use requiring manufacturers to meet charge end-uses. EPA based charge size limits condition that sets charge size limits size limits based on design cooling on UL 484, which is the same approach based on the need to ensure the risk to capacity may allow for more appropriate used for other refrigerants which this human health and the environment selection of unit sizes by the end-user commenter supports. posed by propane is not significantly than the use of room area, as well as The listing of HFC–32 acceptable greater than that for other available greater enforceability. subject to use conditions contained in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19481

today’s action does not prevent OEMs receive a SNAP submission, and did not could communicate the flammability from choosing a different refrigerant; it address in its proposed rulemaking, the risks less clearly than red, and use of only provides an option for those who use of propane in very low temperature two colors for different flammable wish to pursue it. Further, EPA notes refrigeration. refrigerants may both increase confusion that the submission under SNAP for the Comment: Master-Bilt Products stated and dilute the effectiveness of the use of HFC–32 came from an OEM that that the 150 g charge limit will allow for coloring as a warning. EPA is finalizing supports its use in United States as well only 25% of its self-contained models to a requirement to use red PMS #185 as in other markets around the world. be used, as the BTU/hr capacity coloring on hoses and tubing for Comment: A.S. Trust & Holdings required for larger models cannot be equipment charged with HFC–32, R– stated that they are surprised by the achieved at the charge limit. The 441A, or propane in room air high charge amount for HFC–32, given commenter also noted that it is unclear conditioners. This is the same color its flammability. Further, the if multiple systems can use the 150 g specified in AHRI Guideline N–2012, commenter provided charge information charge in one larger model. ‘‘Assignment of Refrigerant Container for R–443A and has noted that the LFL Response: EPA recognizes that a Colors,’’ to identify containers of of R–441A is nearly identical to that of charge size limit, regardless of what it flammable refrigerant, such as propane, R–443A, such that the maximum is, could restrict the types of products isobutane, and R–441A (AHRI, 2012). allowable charge per room volume for a that could be manufactured with these We believe the purpose of the coloring portable AC unit charge with R–441A refrigerants. Manufacturers may choose is to communicate the presence of a could be determined via the similar to pursue these refrigerants for smaller flammable refrigerant and that this chart for R–443A. BTU/hr capacity equipment and/or purpose can be accomplished best by Response: EPA set the charge size investigate technologies that could using the same coloring for HFC–32, limits for HFC–32 using the same extend the use of these refrigerants to propane, isobutane, and R–441A. EPA approach as used for the other larger equipment while still meeting the may consider whether there should be refrigerants listed as acceptable subject 150 g use condition. Consistent with added markings to communicate when to use conditions for self-contained previous actions, (76 FR 78832; a refrigerant may or may not be vented room air conditioners. Charge sizes are December 20, 2011), the charge size in a future rule. higher for HFC–32 under the UL 484 limit applies to any sealed refrigeration Comment: Traulsen agreed that the standard than for propane or R–441A, system in a product, and some products colored hoses and piping may increase the other refrigerants proposed as could employ two or more separate attention. acceptable for use in room air sealed systems. EPA notes that if more Response: EPA agrees with the conditioners, because HFC–32 is far less than one sealed system is employed, commenter. flammable and has a much higher LFL. each must meet the charge size limit Comment: Traulsen stated that the As discussed above, we have set the (i.e., 150 g each). Having multiple sealed benefits of colored hoses and piping charge sizes for R–441A based upon the systems is of less concern than having have not been proven relative to the cost formulas in UL 484, including new a single system with the same combined of burden in any studies. Additionally, charge size limits for portable AC units. charge since the probability of two the commenter noted that if a product Comment: Traulsen stated it agrees sealed systems leaking simultaneously is serviced, there is a risk that the sleeve with the necessity of charge sizes, but is lower than that of any one system or cap may not be properly replaced requested that these limits be leaking. See 76 FR at 78845. unless EPA establishes a ‘‘safe practice’’ continually revisited and updated as for servicers. 4. Color-Coded Hoses and Piping applicable standards update safety Response: EPA does not believe that information. Comment: Daikin stated that HFC–32 this requirement will impose a Response: EPA notes that charge size is unique in being a ‘‘lower burdensome additional cost. The only limits within consensus-based standards flammability’’ refrigerant in the A2L commenter to raise this point did not are under constant revision and category of the ASHRAE standard and provide any information about what updating. In fact, several commenters in being subject to venting restrictions, such costs might be and why the supplied information about one or more as opposed to the other four substitutes commenter thought they would be revisions that are under consideration. If that are ‘‘higher flammability’’ burdensome. EPA believes that the use and when charge sizes are updated, EPA refrigerants in the A3 category of the of a sleeve or cap is consistent with the remains open to revising the charge size ASHRAE standard and that are to be use condition as long as the use condition, whether in response to a exempted from the venting restriction. requirements of the use condition (use petition or in an action initiated by EPA. In light of this, the commenter requested of PMS #185, location, and dimension) Comment: Panasonic Healthcare, a the use of ANSI Safety Yellow PMS are met. However, in order to remain in manufacturer of very low temperature #109 for HFC–32 and continued use of compliance with the use condition, a refrigeration equipment, stated that the red PMS #185 for the other four technician who removes a sleeve during maximum charge size for propane in substitutes. The commenter asserted servicing is required to replace the commercial refrigeration applications that this change will avoid confusion sleeve on the serviced tube. should be 150 g per circuit, matching and inadvertent venting of HFC–32 by The purpose of the colored hoses and the level described for ethane in installers and technicians. tubing in this case is to inform service commercial refrigerators and freezers, Response: Red coloring is understood technicians, consumers and emergency given that both are subject to the 10th to represent ‘‘hot,’’ ‘‘stop,’’ or ‘‘danger,’’ responders that a flammable refrigerant edition of UL 471. and red coloring will provide is in use and to enable technicians to Response: In a previous rulemaking technicians, consumers, and emergency take additional precautions (e.g., (76 FR 78832; December 20, 2011), EPA responders with an unambiguous signal reducing the use of sparking equipment) found propane acceptable subject to use that a potential hazard is present. The as appropriate to avert accidents when conditions, including a charge size limit latter two groups in particular are more servicing the appliance. Color coding is of 150 g as specified in the 10th edition likely to be familiar with the meaning of particularly useful in the event that of UL 471, in stand-alone retail food red coloring and to consider that color labels are no longer legible. The air- refrigeration equipment. EPA did not as a warning of danger. Yellow coloring conditioning and refrigeration industry

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19482 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

currently uses distinguishing colors to service port for non-flammable should be mandatory. Daikin, the identify containers of different refrigerants may establish a ‘‘safe Alliance, and DuPont expressed concern refrigerants. Likewise, distinguishing practice,’’ but noted that it does not that technicians could be confused if coloring is used elsewhere to indicate guarantee servicing companies will EPA exempts certain refrigerants from an unusual and potentially dangerous safely work on installed equipment. The venting requirements. Hoshizaki situation, such as the use of orange- Alliance stated that separate fittings for America commented that U.S. insulated wires in hybrid electric flammable refrigerants, in addition to technicians are not properly trained in vehicles. color coded hosing and piping, will be servicing appliances with flammable The labeling requirement discussed in an effective warning system to alert refrigerants, EPA does not explain the Section III.C.5 will complement the technicians to the presence of risk of explosion well, and that U.S. color-coding requirements by providing flammable substances. ISRI stated that industry and consumers might not be a more precise warning of the potential these fittings will be useful for the aware that a unit contains flammable hazards and necessary precautions. future recovery of refrigerants by substances. ARA includes a list of Further, it is possible that labels, recyclers. questions about MSDSs that HVACR particularly those on the outside of the Response: EPA agrees with contractors can ask to improve safety appliance, may be removed or fall off or commenters that service ports and with any refrigerant. become illegible over time; adding red unique fittings should not be required Response: While EPA appreciates the coloring on tubing inside the appliance for self-contained equipment given the concerns raised by the commenters, we provides additional assurance that increased risk of system leaks. EPA also have been exempting certain refrigerant technicians will be aware that a agrees that separate fittings for substitutes from the venting prohibition flammable refrigerant is present. flammable refrigerants, in addition to since 1995. EPA already exempts certain color-coded hosing and piping and refrigerants used from the venting 5. Labeling warning labels, can be an effective prohibition including propane (in retail Comment: Traulsen, ISRI, Daikin, and warning system to alert technicians to food refrigeration—stand-alone units Hudson Technologies expressed support the presence of flammable substances, only), and isobutane and R–441A (in for the requirement for warning labels. and that these fittings would be useful household refrigerators, freezers, and Traulsen stated that because equipment for the future recovery of refrigerants by combination refrigerator/freezers). is designed for multiple markets with recyclers. We disagree with the Therefore, we do not believe that different languages, the warning commenters that suggested we require continuing with this established symbols and colors should be sufficient unique fittings as a use condition. While practice should cause confusion. to allow for 1⁄8-inch lettering in the UL there are some benefits to unique The Agency understands that over the standards as opposed to the 1⁄4-inch fittings, there are also concerns. As we past 20 years there have been numerous proposed. recognized in our December 2011 rule, developments in this industry and that Response: EPA appreciates the these concerns include that: Installation often training programs are developed to support for the requirement for warning of fittings at the time of manufacture is familiarize technicians with these labels. Regarding the lettering size, EPA not appropriate for certain appliance changes, including the introduction of continues to believe that it would be types; additional fittings present an new refrigerants. EPA is aware of such difficult to read warning labels with the increased leak risk; the ease of continuing education programs offered smaller 1⁄8-inch lettering stipulated by circumventing the requirement; and by vocational schools, unions, trade UL 250 and UL 471 and is finalizing the inconsistency with UL and international associations, equipment manufacturers 1⁄4-inch minimum height proposed, standards. In particular because the and other entities that provide making it easier for technicians, types of equipment in this rule are self- technicians information on a range of consumers, retail store-owners, and contained and have a hermetically- technology developments. Therefore, emergency first responders to see the sealed refrigerant circuit, installing the Agency recommends that anyone warning labels. The color markings fittings at manufacture would increase servicing appliances with a flammable would be inside the equipment where the risk of leakage and thus increase refrigerant receive appropriate training technicians could see them, but not potential of a fire. Also, the UL and follow industry best practices. consumers, retail store-owners, or standards that are incorporated by Given the extent of technical knowledge emergency first responders. The reference in the use conditions do not available within the industry and the warning symbol appears in fewer allow for equipment to be constructed presence of voluntary training programs, locations than the warning labels and with an access port (which would be we believe that it is not necessary for provides less information, and thus is where unique servicing fittings would EPA to require training at this time in not a substitute for an easily readable set be installed on the equipment). order for these newly listed refrigerants of warning statements. Therefore, this final rule continues to to be used as safely as other refrigerants recommend, but not require, only if currently available. 6. Unique Service Fittings someone chooses to add an access port EPA is not requiring training through Comment: The Alliance, Hudson that they do so with separate servicing today’s action. EPA notes that the Technologies, and ISRI, supported the fittings for flammable refrigerants and Agency does require technician use of unique service fittings for that they only consider this where it is certification under Section 608 for flammable refrigerants, in response to not prohibited by the required UL technicians servicing, maintaining, or EPA’s proposal to recommend, but not standard. repairing appliances containing ozone- require, such fittings. Hudson depleting refrigerants, but does not Technologies and ISRI stated that EPA F. Technician Training require any specific training and the should require unique service fittings. Comment: A number of commenters certification program is limited in its Traulsen agreed with the decision to not stated that technicians should be scope, as it is not intended to replace require service ports for self-contained properly trained in handling flammable vocational training. The goals of the equipment given the increased risk of refrigerants, with Traulsen, NAFEM, Section 608 technician certification system leaks. The commenter ICOR, Hudson Technologies, and the program reflect the need to reduce acknowledged that requiring a different Alliance commenting that training emissions during servicing,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19483

maintenance, repair, and disposal. The significant impact on the environment, address flammable refrigerants— complete requirements are included at with a 100-year GWP of 675, raised through a separate process. 40 CFR part 82, subpart F. Currently the concerns about its toxicity in the Comment: CARB was concerned with regulations require anyone who context of venting, and stated that it the potential increase in ground-level services, maintains or repairs appliances should not be exempt from the venting ozone formation resulting from venting containing an ozone-depleting prohibition. hydrocarbons, especially in non- refrigerant to be tested and certified. Response: EPA did not propose to attainment regions in California such as However, the Agency is undertaking a create an exemption to the venting the South Coast Air Basin and the San review of the Section 608 technician prohibition for HFC–32 and is not Joaquin Valley Air Basin. CARB certification requirements—including establishing such an exemption in this commented that their own modeling whether to address flammable final action. Therefore, the venting results agree with the conclusion of refrigerant substitutes—through a prohibition under Section 608 and the Scenario 4 of EPA’s air quality modeling separate process. implementing regulations at 40 CFR results. Response: EPA has assessed the G. Venting Prohibition 82.154(a)(1) on knowingly venting, releasing, or disposing of refrigerant possible increase in ground-level ozone Comment: ISRI and a number of substitutes still applies to HFC–32 (and formation and believes it is appropriate private citizens support EPA’s all other fluorinated gases), including in to finalize the exemption from the conclusion that venting hydrocarbons the end-use for which we are taking venting prohibition as described in this does not pose a threat to the final action today under SNAP (i.e., action. We found that even if all the environment. One commenter notes that room AC units). refrigerant in appliances in end-uses other countries allow venting of addressed in this rule were to be Comment: Traulsen, Hoshizaki hydrocarbons. In contrast, Hudson emitted, there would be a worst-case America, NAFEM and DuPont Technologies believes intentional impact in the Los Angeles area of less expressed concern about the potential venting to the atmosphere to be poor than 0.15 ppb. Further, this estimate is confusion from and safety consequences environmental policy and that the low likely to be higher than the impact of EPA’s proposal to exempt certain GWP of hydrocarbons does not justify resulting from actual emissions due to substances from the venting prohibition. their exemption from venting venting of the refrigerant substitutes prohibitions. DuPont states that the differential listed in this rule in the specified end- Response: For the reasons discussed treatment of refrigerants in such a uses, because the estimate includes in section III.D, ‘‘Venting prohibition,’’ manner could be misunderstood and emissions from a more reactive EPA agrees that venting, release, or could lead to unintended venting and refrigerant substitute that is not listed disposal of the following hydrocarbon environmental consequences from the and not allowed to be vented under this refrigerant substitutes in the following release of ozone-depleting refrigerants. rule. Because of the relatively low air end-uses and subject to the use Response: EPA has evaluated the quality impacts of these refrigerants if conditions listed in this action does not environmental and safety considerations they are released to the atmosphere in pose a threat to the environment: (1) of venting in: (1) Isobutane and R–441A limited amounts, as well as the factors Isobutane and R–441A in retail food in retail food refrigerators and freezers discussed above, such as their low refrigerators and freezers (stand-alone (stand-alone units only); (2) propane in GWP, zero ODP, and lack of aquatic units only); (2) propane in household household refrigerators, freezers, and effects, EPA is concluding that these refrigerators, freezers, and combination combination refrigerators and freezers; four hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes refrigerators and freezers; (3) ethane in (3) ethane in very low temperature in the end-uses and subject to the use very low temperature refrigeration refrigeration equipment and equipment conditions do not pose a threat to the equipment and equipment for non- for non-mechanical heat transfer; (4) R– environment. For more detail, see mechanical heat transfer; (4) R–441A, 441A, propane, and isobutane in Sections III.D, IV.A and VI.B. propane, and isobutane in vending vending machines; and (5) propane and Comment: Two private citizens state machines; and (5) propane and R–441A R–441A in self-contained room air that hydrocarbons are non-toxic and in self-contained room air conditioners conditioners for residential and light therefore venting of hydrocarbon for residential and light commercial air commercial air conditioning and heat refrigerants into the atmosphere would conditioning and heat pumps. EPA’s pumps. After this review, EPA has be an acceptable practice. decision is based on consideration of determined the exempted releases do Response: While the hydrocarbons multiple environmental characteristics not pose a threat to the environment and being listed as acceptable in this rule are and not just GWP. The comments do not thus that it is appropriate to exempt generally low in toxicity, they can lead give us sufficient reason to change our these refrigerant in these specific end- to asphyxiation and other adverse proposed conclusion that these uses and subject to these use conditions health effects in high enough refrigerant substitutes in these end-uses, from the venting prohibition under concentrations. Therefore, EPA subject to the required use conditions, Section 608(c) of the CAA. The considered exposure limits and do not pose a threat to the environment comments do not provide sufficient potential exposure concentrations when or to change this final rule so that they grounds to compel us to change that assessing the safety and the would not be exempt from the venting conclusion. While EPA appreciates the acceptability of hydrocarbons under prohibition. concerns raised by the commenters, the SNAP. This analysis found that the In addition, EPA’s exemption from agency has been exempting certain listed refrigerant substitutes, when used the CAA venting prohibition of these refrigerant substitutes from the venting according to the required use substances in these end-uses is prohibition since 1995. Therefore, we conditions, would not exceed the consistent with how other countries, do not believe that continuing with this relevant exposure limits (e.g., TLVs, including Australia, Japan, and those in established practice should cause STELs, or AEGLs), indicating that the European Union, regulate the confusion. Also, as discussed above, the toxicity is not a significant risk for the venting of hydrocarbons. Agency is undertaking a review of the specific refrigerant substitutes in the Comment: ARA and some private Section 608 technician certification end-uses listed when used according to citizens asserted that HFC–32 has a requirements—including whether to the required use conditions. See

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19484 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

Sections III.D.4.ii and IV.C for more closing a door, use of a torch during in the docket for this rule (AIRAH, detail on EPA’s toxicity assessment of servicing, or a short circuit in wiring 2013). these refrigerants during servicing and that controls the motor of a compressor), Comment: DuPont stated that the disposal. Thus to the extent that this an explosion or fire could occur’’ (76 FR presence of lubricants during the information is relevant to EPA’s at 78837). The 2011 SNAP rule venting process can potentially increase determination under Section 608(c)(2), continues by stating that, ‘‘To determine risk of ignition, and is not sure whether EPA does not believe that toxicity whether the three hydrocarbon EPA fully evaluated these potential considerations preclude finalizing the refrigerants would present flammability risks. exemption from the venting prohibition concerns for service and manufacture Response: EPA has evaluated this in this action. personnel or for consumers, EPA potential risk and taken it into consideration in this action. Most Comment: Traulsen, Hoshizaki reviewed the submitters’ detailed lubricant will remain in the unit, along America, NAFEM, ICOR and DuPont assessments of the probability of events with a small amount of hydrocarbon expressed concerns about the that might create a fire, as well as flammability of hydrocarbon refrigerants refrigerant substitutes. Typical engineering approaches to avoid and the adequacy of safety measures compressor oils have flashpoints over sparking from the refrigeration during venting. DuPont stated that 130 °C, which is well above both equipment. EPA also conducted risk because of the low minimum ignition ambient temperatures and the flashpoint energy of hydrocarbon refrigerants, screens, available in the docket for [that] of the hydrocarbon refrigerant these refrigerants are easily ignited by rulemaking, evaluating reasonable substitutes in this rule. Thus, the static electricity. This commenter stated worst-case scenarios to model the effects presence of compressor oil should not that venting in an uncontrolled of the sudden release of the refrigerants. have a significant effect on the environment could lead to unsafe The worst-case scenario analysis for flammability of the refrigerant-oil conditions. NAFEM and ICOR each of the three hydrocarbons revealed mixture. Our risk screens available in mentioned that use of a class B fire that even if the unit’s full charge were the docket for this rulemaking find that extinguisher would not be sufficient to emitted within one minute, the even if the full charge is lost in one avoid an explosive condition. concentration would not reach the LFL minute, the LFL of the hydrocarbon Response: Because of safety concerns, for that hydrocarbon’’ (id. at 78839). refrigerant substitute is not reached. EPA has required numerous use EPA’s risk screens evaluating the Having said that, the Agency conditions for appliances using environmental, toxicity and recommends technicians working with flammable refrigerants as part of the flammability risks of the refrigerant hydrocarbon refrigerants follow proper SNAP listings. A discussion of the substitutes and end-uses in this action safety precautions, such as ensuring SNAP use conditions and EPA’s came to similar conclusions that the their workspace is well-ventilated and assessment of safety, which considered LFL would not be exceeded. Thus, removing ignition sources. a full release of the charge within one although end-users should take Observance of OSHA requirements minute, is available in the risk screens precautions to reduce sparking from could further limit concentrations and released with the proposal. When it static electricity, this concern is not attendant flammability risks associated comes to servicing, the charge size limit sufficient to cause EPA to prohibit use with those oils. For example, OSHA has and the labeling requirements (e.g., of these refrigerant substitutes or to a PEL for one class of compressor oil, visible warning statement and red decline to exempt these refrigerant mineral oil mist, of 5 mg/m3 of air, as coloring on the pipes, hoses and devices substitutes in the specified end-uses well as rules for respiratory protection which contain refrigerant) will reduce when used according to the required use and personal protective equipment that the risk of a fire significantly. However, conditions. apply. EPA additionally notes that the additional precautions are very small amount of dissolved Use of a Class B fire extinguisher recommended, like ensuring proper compressor oil expected to be used in would not prevent a fire or explosive ventilation and avoiding ignition the small hydrocarbon charge size condition from occurring, as the sources during servicing. required by the use conditions will Concerning the risks of fire from static commenter suggested; but if there is a significantly mitigate the amount and electricity, EPA notes this concern about fire, it is important to use a Class B the impact of any release into the the ignition of hydrocarbon refrigerants extinguisher that is intended for use environment of lubricants dissolved in was discussed in the 2011 SNAP rule, with hydrocarbon fires, rather than a the hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes in which propane was evaluated for use Class A extinguisher intended for use that may result from any venting, in stand-alone retail food refrigeration with fires from wood, paper, or other release or disposal that may occur under equipment and R–441A and isobutane ordinary combustibles. The statements this final action. EPA also notes that were evaluated for use in household in the ‘‘further information’’ column for many of the lubricants used with refrigerators and freezers, and were each listing, including the hydrocarbon refrigerants, such as alkyl determined to be acceptable, subject to recommendation for having a Class B benzene and polyalkylene glycol, are use conditions, under SNAP. In section dry powder type fire extinguisher considered environmentally acceptable ‘‘B. Flammability’’ of part IV of that available, are not intended to be a because they biodegrade easily, as noted SNAP rule, titled ‘‘What is the basis for comprehensive set of all precautions in EPA’s document on environmentally EPA’s final action?’’ the Agency needed, but rather basic guidelines or acceptable lubricants, available in the describes the evaluation and conclusion areas of consideration that users should docket. for approving those hydrocarbon consider as they develop their own EPA received a similar comment on refrigerant substitutes for the specific safety programs. The Australian the rule exempting isobutane and R– end-uses under the use conditions. The Institute of Refrigeration, Air Conditions 441A, as refrigerant substitutes in 2011 SNAP rule explains that, ‘‘when and Heating (AIRAH) provides useful household refrigerators, freezers, and the concentration of a flammable guidance on safety precautions combination refrigerators and freezers, refrigerant reaches or exceeds its LFL in technicians can follow when servicing and propane as a refrigerant substitute the presence of an ignition source (e.g., equipment containing flammable in retail food refrigerators and freezers a static electricity spark resulting from refrigerants. This document is included (stand-alone units only) (see 79 FR

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19485

29682). EPA considered such studies handle flammable refrigerant responsible for servicing appliances. and the influence of lubricant on the substitutes, whether or not they are Also, the Agency intends to update the LFLs of the hydrocarbon refrigerants in subject to an exemption from the test bank for technician certification the specific end-uses in that rule when venting prohibition. See also EPA’s under Section 608 of the CAA as we finding them acceptable subject to use guidance in the further information have done previously, and will consider conditions under the SNAP program column in 40 CFR part 82, subpart G, including additional questions on (see December 20, 2011; 76 FR 78832, Appendix R, concerning appropriate flammable refrigerants. By adding such sections ‘‘D. Charge Size Limitation personal protective equipment (PPE), questions to the test bank, EPA would (Household Refrigeration)’’ and ‘‘E. type of fire extinguisher to use, use of supplement but would not replace Charge Size Limitation (Retail Food spark-proof tools, use of recovery technician training programs currently Refrigeration)’’ and discussions of equipment designed for flammable provided by non-government entities. Standards UL 250 and UL 471 regarding refrigerants, and releasing refrigerant to We will seek additional information and lubricant oil). We believe that same well-ventilated areas. guidance on how best to incorporate analysis and the same results are Comment: Traulsen and NAFEM this content through a separate process applicable here. stated that EPA should reevaluate the outside of this final rule. Comment: A private citizen states that suggestion that venting should be Comment: Traulsen has not found a replacing old refrigerants with new ones conducted outside of a building because solution regarding EPA’s question about decreases the risk of toxicity yet of local codes, lease terms, or logistical an industry standard for hydrocarbon increases a risk of combustion. This concerns that may make outdoor recovery units and their availability in commenter asked who would be venting disruptive or even impossible. the U.S. market. No other commenters responsible for fires due to use and One of these commenters, Traulsen, also provided information on such an disposal of these refrigerants (e.g., is concerned that EPA has not yet industry standard. junkyard owner, appliance owner) and outlined what a network of properly Response: EPA is not aware of an whether EPA and appliance trained service professionals to handle industry standard for hydrocarbon manufacturers are responsible for venting practices safely would consist recovery equipment, but encourages ensuring that the end user is aware of of, yet assumes that one will exist. industry to develop one. However, the risks from the usage and disposal of Response: EPA is not requiring that agency is aware of the existence of some flammable refrigerants. flammable refrigerant substitutes from hydrocarbon recovery devices. One of Response: In this rule, EPA is appliances be vented, nor that they be those recovery devices uses activated exempting certain hydrocarbon vented outside. We recognize that carbon to assist in the safe removal of refrigerants in specific applications from outdoor venting may not always be hydrocarbons from appliances. A the venting prohibition, not making a feasible and that such activity may be canister containing activated carbon is determination of fault for individual restricted by fire codes. Venting pulled to a 25 in.Hg vacuum. The incidents such as fires, which global outdoors is likely to allow sufficient canister is then filled with nitrogen up experience indicates can be prevented ventilation to reduce concentrations and to 10 psi and pulled to a vacuum again with appropriate precautions. Thus, the mitigate flammability risks, but to bring oxygen levels below 0.1% in commenter’s point about who would be sufficient ventilation could also be the cylinder, thereby preventing responsible for fires is outside the scope provided by engineered ventilation conditions that might allow ignition. of this rulemaking. With respect to the systems. Some manufacturers and end- The canister is then attached to the commenter’s concerns about the end- users may instead choose to recover appliance containing a hydrocarbon user’s awareness, in the Agency’s risk flammable refrigerants rather than refrigerant. The hydrocarbon refrigerant screen, we have assessed a worst-case venting. While the use conditions under is pulled from the appliance into the scenario for consumer exposure SNAP finalized by this action, in canister and the canister is then sealed (available in the docket for this particular charge size, will minimize off. This can be done with no pump or rulemaking). Even in that worst-case safety risk, other precautions are other electrical equipment near the scenario, the charge size for these recommended, like ensuring proper equipment containing the flammable approved applications is small enough ventilation and avoiding ignition refrigerant. The carbon within the that if the complete charge is lost within sources during servicing. These would canister bonds with the hydrocarbon, one minute in a confined space, the also be appropriate guidelines, whether eliminating its ability to oxidize or burn. amount released does not reach the LFL, venting or recovering the refrigerant. Once the process is complete, the and therefore, a fire would not occur. AIRAH provides useful guidance on hydrocarbon can be recovered from the Further, charges in the analyzed safety precautions technicians can canister and appropriately managed for scenarios do not exceed the relevant follow when servicing equipment with reuse or disposal. Given the lack of exposure limits, and therefore, there flammable refrigerants. One of those additional information on standards for should not be a significant toxicity risk. practices is to connect a hose to the recovery equipment for hydrocarbon Since junkyards, scrap yards, and other appliance to allow for venting the refrigerant substitutes, and our finding facilities disposing of or recycling small refrigerant outside. This document is that release of the specific refrigerants in appliances are already bound by the included in the docket for this rule. We the specific end-uses identified in this venting prohibition, they should already note that at least two organizations, rule do not pose a threat to the have a system in place to determine RSES and the ESCO Institute, already environment, we continue to believe whether an appliance contains an ODS offer training for handling of flammable there is reason for allowing venting of or substitute refrigerant. EPA believes refrigerants, which is the first step to the hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes that the required labeling of the product building a network of properly trained in the specified end-uses as an and prominent red marking on the technicians. Similarly, equipment alternative to recovery. refrigeration circuit will help these manufacturers and end-users that have Comment: ISRI seeks clarification on facilities to identify that the appliance sent EPA SNAP submissions for how 40 CFR 82.156(f) applies to the contains a flammable refrigerant. Thus, flammable refrigerants have indicated recycling of appliances with exempt these facilities likely have procedures in that there is technician training for their substitutes that may be vented pursuant place to identify and appropriately own staff and for contractors to 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19486 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

Response: Under 40 CFR 82.156(f), hydrocarbons in certain end-uses listed subject to a limited exception if the the person who takes the final step in as acceptable subject to use conditions ignitable refrigerant is to be recycled. the disposal process (including but not under SNAP. Specifically, EPA is Ignitable refrigerant that has been used limited to scrap recyclers and landfill exempting from the venting prohibition and has become contaminated through operators) of a small appliance, room the following refrigerant substitutes in use would fit the definition of a spent AC, MVACs, or MVAC-like appliances the following uses: (1) Isobutane and R– material under RCRA (40 CFR must either recover any remaining 441A in retail food refrigerators and 261.1(c)(1)) if it must be reclaimed prior refrigerant in accordance with the freezers (stand-alone units only); (2) to its reuse. Spent materials that are regulations or verify that refrigerant has propane in household refrigerators, reclaimed are solid wastes per Section been evacuated previously. Since the freezers, and combination refrigerators 261.2(c). However, if the hydrocarbon current definition of refrigerant and freezers; (3) ethane in very low refrigerant is recovered for direct reuse excludes non-ozone-depleting temperature refrigeration equipment (i.e., no reclamation), it would not be refrigerant substitutes, these and equipment for non-mechanical heat classified as a solid or a hazardous recordkeeping requirements do not transfer; (4) R–441A, propane, and waste (40 CFR 261.2(e)). EPA believes presently apply to the hydrocarbon isobutane in vending machines; and (5) that recycling of these materials would refrigerant substitutes in the specified propane and R–441A in self-contained require cleaning before they are reused. end-uses that are the subject of this room air conditioners for residential and action. The only requirement under 40 light commercial air conditioning and H. Cost and Economic Impacts CFR part 82 Subpart F that would have heat pumps. 1. Equipment Redesign applied is the venting prohibition. The commenter’s request to modify Comment: NAFEM and Hoshizaki However, since EPA is exempting those the hazardous waste regulations is America stated that refrigeration hydrocarbons for the specific uses from beyond the scope of this rulemaking, equipment manufacturers would incur the venting prohibition in this final rule, since it focuses on Sections 608 and 612 that prohibition would no longer apply. of the CAA. However, as discussed in capital costs in switching to flammable Moreover, as this action does not change the final rule exempting from the refrigerants because they would need to the applicability of other environmental venting prohibition isobutane and R– redesign equipment and facilities to regulations, other applicable 441A, as refrigerant substitutes in eliminate ignition sources to reduce the environmental regulations would household refrigerators, freezers, and risk of fire. Hoshizaki America stated continue to apply (e.g., under RCRA). combination refrigerators and freezers; that manufacturers would have to go Comment: ISRI notes that in the last and propane, as a refrigerant substitute through considerable and costly staff rule exempting isobutane and R–441A in retail food refrigerators and freezers training to understand the risks of as refrigerant substitutes in household (stand-alone units only); incidental explosion for the proposed list of refrigerators, freezers, and combination releases that occur during the substitutes. Master-Bilt Products stated refrigerators and freezers, and propane maintenance, service, and repair of that the large expenses for upgrading as a refrigerant substitute in retail food appliances would not be subject to factories and additional testing to meet refrigerators and freezers (stand-alone RCRA requirements for the disposal of different standards will slow innovation units only) (see 79 FR 29682), EPA hazardous waste because this would not for their business as well as other small stated that certain hydrocarbons could constitute disposal of the refrigerant businesses. be characterized as hazardous waste due charge as a solid waste, per se (see 79 Response: EPA agrees that to their flammability (as defined under FR 29687). manufacturers choosing to use one of the RCRA regulations; see 40 CFR The commenter raises questions about the refrigerants listed in this rule may 261.21). The commenter notes that the how the hazardous waste requirements need to make capital investments in agency also stated that incidental under RCRA apply at disposal (or in the their facilities, including the redesign of releases of these hydrocarbons ‘‘would case of scrap metal recycling, equipment to handle flammable not be subject to RCRA requirements for disassembly) of an appliance. Under the refrigerants, and may need to invest in the disposal of hazardous waste as the RCRA requirements at 40 CFR part 261, training their staff to handle flammable release would occur incidentally during it does appear that certain refrigerants, refrigerants safely. These investments the maintenance, service and repair of like hydrocarbons, could potentially be would be needed for safe use of these the equipment, and would not subject to regulation as hazardous refrigerants and would be needed constitute disposal of the refrigerant wastes if they exhibit the ignitability irrespective of use conditions charge as solid waste, per se,’’ (79 FR characteristic. established by EPA in listing these 29687). ISRI seeks clarity on whether In the case of household appliances, refrigerants as acceptable subject to use full venting is allowed if flammable repair and disposal of hydrocarbons conditions. Therefore manufacturers refrigerants have been exempted from would not be considered hazardous may decide, based on their own the venting prohibition at 40 CFR waste management because the business considerations, whether to 82.154(a). The commenter also seeks appliance is exempt from the hazardous pursue hydrocarbon refrigerants. This clarity on whether hydrocarbons would waste regulations under the household rule does not restrict nonflammable be considered hazardous waste under hazardous waste exemption at 40 CFR substitutes currently in use nor does it RCRA. The commenter suggests that 261.4(b)(1) (although States may have require manufacturers to use any of the EPA could create a new exclusion from more stringent regulations). The flammable substitute refrigerants listed hazardous waste at 40 CFR 261.4(b) for refrigerant could therefore generally be through this action. an acceptable ignitable refrigerant vented without triggering RCRA Comment: Master-Bilt commented substitute, or determine that an hazardous waste requirements. that if multiple systems using the 150 g acceptable ignitable refrigerant is On the other hand, for commercial charge can be used in larger models, equivalent to household waste under 40 and industrial appliances that are not propane could potentially be used in CFR 261.4(b)(1). generated by households as defined in some larger equipment, but the cost Response: In this rule, EPA is 40 CFR 261.4(b)(1), ignitable refrigerants would go up approximately 25–50% exempting from the venting prohibition would be subject to regulation as and the systems would be more under CAA Section 608(c) certain hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 261.21) complex.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19487

Response: The 150 g limit applies to I. Statutory and Executive Order with the requirements in this final rule each refrigerant circuit and multiple Reviews and must also comply with state, local, circuits could be used in the same piece Comment: Traulsen stated that EPA’s or tribal laws. For example, if local of equipment, as discussed above under rule adding to the list of acceptable occupancy codes do not allow section VI.E.3. We agree with the SNAP substitutes may not be affected by intentional release of hydrocarbons on commenter that the cost for models that the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), but the premises, or if a state regulation have multiple circuits could be higher any requirement related to the removal limits VOC releases, a technician may and that the systems would be more of a previously approved substance not be able to release hydrocarbon refrigerants to the atmosphere, even if complex. We are not requiring would violate the RFA. Traulsen they would be permitted to do so by this manufacturers to use propane or any of expressed concern about the potential rule. the substitute refrigerants listed in this future impacts on small businesses if action. flammable refrigerants, including the J. Relationship With Other Rules 2. Market Options proposed refrigerants, become the only Comment: NAFEM, Master-Bilt refrigerant options available, combined Products, and private citizens raised Comment: Traulsen believes this rule with uncertainties such as building concerns about the relationship between will give the industry more flexibility to disparities and placement and this rule and the proposed rule, explore market options. EIA believes the installation of equipment. Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: rule will allow U.S. businesses to sell Response: EPA agrees with the Change of Listing Status for Certain international products domestically and commenter that this final rule, which Substitutes under the Significant New encourage foreign businesses to expand adds to the list of acceptable substitutes, Alternatives Policy Program (August 6, their manufacturing operations and is consistent with requirements of the 2014, 79 FR 46126). Among the distribution in the United States. RFA. The commenter raises a concern concerns expressed are that available Response: EPA agrees with the that actions that remove substitutes alternatives to comply with the other commenters. Whenever the Agency from the list of acceptable substitutes proposed rule are not commercially expands the list of acceptable could have implications for the RFA. available drop-in replacements, thus substitutes it provides industry, EPA will address the RFA in any action requiring redesign of equipment, including manufacturers, with more proposing and finalizing a decision to additional testing, training, and cost; the flexibility and options. remove one or more substitutes from the compliance date proposed in the other lists of acceptable substitutes. rule is too short; the potential for 3. Recycling Comment: Traulsen commented that detrimental effects of alternative although this rule adding these refrigerants on energy efficiency Comment: ISRI is concerned that EPA substitutes may not be affected by the may not have adequately considered the demanded by Department of Energy Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (DOE) standards; and the charge size impacts of the proposed rule on the (UMRA) or Paperwork Reduction Act recycling industry. The commenter restrictions in this rule will mean many (PRA), subsequent SNAP rules may. types of equipment will not be able to stated that, for example, the recycling Response: EPA will address how industry (NAICS 423930) was not even use the refrigerants listed in this rule to these Acts apply to any subsequent comply with the Change of Listing identified as potentially affected in action in that separate action. Table 1 of the proposed rule. Status proposed rule. Comment: Traulsen stated that it Response: The concerns raised by Response: EPA has added the supports the Agency’s adoption of well- these commenters concern the basis for recycling industry in Table 1 in this known and developed safety standards certain decisions in the Change of final rule. Further, EPA has performed like those issued by UL and other Listing Status proposed rule, including research to consider impacts of the rule organizations under the application of whether alternatives other than those on the recycling industry more fully the National Technology Transfer and we propose to list as unacceptable are (ICF, 2015b). We investigated the Advancement Act (NTTAA). available and what is the appropriate impacts of use of flammable refrigerants Response: EPA appreciates the date on which a substitute is no longer in waste streams of other countries support for this aspect of the rule. acceptable for use. EPA will address using these refrigerants. This analysis Comment: Traulsen expressed interest these issues concerning the Change of found that it is not anticipated that the in EPA’s statement regarding the Listing Status proposed rule when we recycling industry will experience position of deferring to agencies with take final action on that proposal. As additional risk if appliances containing jurisdiction in other areas, with regards discussed above in section VI.B.2, hydrocarbon refrigerants are sent to to Executive Order (EO) 13132: ‘‘Energy efficiency and indirect climate recycling facilities prior to the Federalism and 13175: Tribal impacts,’’ available information refrigerant being properly vented or Governments. Specifically, the supports reduced energy use with the evacuated. This analysis suggested that commenter is interested in how those refrigerants being listed in this final recycling facilities should vent or orders apply to the installation of rule. We note that we are continually otherwise remove the refrigerant equipment in localities where the reviewing and listing additional (consistent with other requirements like substitutes are regulated under different alternatives for the various end-uses at RCRA) before any mechanical authorities, including VOC and building issue. processing of the appliance (e.g., occupancy codes. Comment: NAFEM stated that their shredders, choppers, magnets), due to Response: This regulation does not industry has been inundated with the potential presence of ignition impose direct requirements on state, various DOE energy standards sources. Further, based upon experience local, or tribal governments, nor does it rulemakings, as well as this rule and the with flammable refrigerants in Europe, preempt state, local, or tribal law, the proposed rule concerning changing the Australia, and Japan, there are best major concerns of EO 13132 and 13175. listing status of some alternatives. The practices for handling flammable When using the refrigerants in this final commenter mentioned the timing and refrigerants at disposal, such as those rule, technicians, end users, and cumulative impacts of other government provided by AIRAH (2013). manufacturers would need to comply actions and requested a 60-day

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19488 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

extension to the comment period for be manufactured without meeting the provided to the Agency, as well as a EPA’s proposal to change the listing use conditions of this rule, which we sizing guide. status of certain alternatives. believe are necessary to mitigate risk Response: EPA has consistently Response: This comment concerns the sufficiently for these substitutes to be evaluated alternatives through a risk comment period on a separate rule. EPA acceptable. If the commenter is instead screen process that begins with a highly responded to this request to extend the referring to delaying the date of conservative worst-case scenario, such public comment period on the proposal compliance of the Change of Listing as where the entire refrigerant charge of to change the listing status of certain Status Rule, we will address that a window AC unit leaks out rapidly in alternatives by granting a 14-day compliance date when we take final a specific room size. If a substitute’s extension. For further information, action on that rule. concentrations remain below the LFL please see EPA Docket # EPA–HQ– and relevant toxicity limits in the worst- OAR–2014–0198, ‘‘Protection of L. Other Comments case scenario with highly conservative Stratospheric Ozone: Change of Listing 1. Propylene assumptions, we do no further Status for Certain Substitutes under the assessment. If the substitute’s Significant New Alternatives Policy Comment: A.S Trust & Holdings concentrations exceed the LFL or a Program.’’ commented that propylene, a relevant toxicity limit in the worst-case component of the refrigerant R–443A, is scenario, then we consider more typical K. Timing of Final Rule not toxic and included an industry scenarios based on less conservative Comment: Daikin, EIA, and some standard reference to prove this. This assumptions. EPA will consider the private citizens requested EPA to move commenter also stated that they thought submitter’s risk assessment and forward with the final rule as quickly as EPA was confusing propylene with recommended charge sizes as part of our possible, while NAFEM requested that propylene glycol. ongoing review of R–443A. EPA has not EPA delay both this final rule and the Response: EPA has not proposed proposed action on R–443A in this rule final rule to change the listing status of action on propylene or on R–443A in and is not taking action on R–443A at certain alternatives. Commenters in this rule and is not taking action on this time. favor of finalizing the rule as quickly as propylene or R–443A at this time. We possible cite environmental reasons and 3. Reductions of HFC Emissions Under included propylene in our analysis of Other Sections of CAA Title VI point out that hydrocarbons are already air quality effects because EPA has widely in use around the world. received a submission for R–443A, a Comment: CARB urges EPA to Commenters in favor of delay note the blend containing propylene, for use in continue to use its existing authority separate proposal concerning the change residential air conditioners, including under the CAA Sections 608 and 609 to of status of certain substitutes and portable AC units. In order to consider reduce HFC emissions from all sources, requested that EPA extend the the potential ground-level ozone including stationary refrigeration and compliance deadline to ensure adequate impacts of all refrigerants under review AC, insulating foam, consumer product training. for the end-uses in this rule, we aerosol propellants, and MVAC. Response: EPA appreciates the analyzed the potential impacts of Response: The comment’s suggestions support from those commenters propylene along with other hydrocarbon go beyond the scope of this rule. requesting rapid promulgation of this refrigerants. However, our review has Separate from this rulemaking action, rule. We agree that finalizing this rule EPA is considering input from various promptly allows for earlier use of the not progressed to include review of R– 443A’s toxicity. stakeholders about possible actions lower GWP refrigerants in this rule and under Section 608 and other parts of the allows earlier and greater climate We note that in our reviews of Act to address impacts of HFCs and benefits than delaying issuance of the toxicity, we do not characterize would welcome any comments the rule. Training would be more useful for substances as ‘‘toxic’’ or ‘‘non-toxic.’’ commenter would care to provide on technicians and manufacturer personnel Rather, EPA considers exposure limits this subject. if it addresses the requirements of this and potential exposure concentrations final rule as set forth in the use when assessing the toxicity and 4. Refrigerants for Retrofit conditions. We disagree with the determining whether a substitute should Comment: Hudson Technologies commenter who suggests that this rule be listed as acceptable and, if so, suggested that the determination that a should not be finalized, and thus the whether a use condition is necessary. substitute is acceptable for use as a substitutes should not be acceptable for For example, for propane, EPA retrofit refrigerant for existing use, until there is ‘‘adequate training.’’ evaluated whether long-term exposure equipment should be more highly Some companies have already begun would exceed a TLV of 1,000 ppm and scrutinized by EPA, even when dealing training and are prepared to use these whether short-term exposure would with non-flammable substitutes. This refrigerants now. As we discussed in exceed an AEGL of 6,900 ppm. If EPA commenter recommends that EPA limit section VI.F, ‘‘Technician training’’ uses the same approach for other listings for acceptable refrigerants to use above, we are not including a refrigerants mentioned by the in new equipment unless the substitute requirement for technician training as a commenter, we might use industry has a lower GWP and the use of the use condition. Further, we believe that exposure limits that are more difficult to substitute in existing equipment will issuing this final rule with a delayed achieve (e.g., TLV of 500 ppm for not result in loss of efficiency. date of compliance would increase risk propylene). Response: This comment goes beyond to manufacturers and the public. A 2. R–443A the scope of this rulemaking. This final number of submitters have provided rule establishes use conditions limiting EPA with the required 90-day notice Comment: A.S Trust & Holdings the five refrigerants listed to use in new prior to introducing these substitutes commented on certain assumptions that equipment designed for that refrigerant. into interstate commerce; therefore, EPA mentioned as its likely approach to EPA evaluates each submission on its delaying the compliance date would not assessing R–443A, including worst-case merits and where a submitter requests delay introduction of these substitutes, assumptions. This commenter referred that a substitute be listed as acceptable but it would allow some equipment to EPA to his own risk assessment for use in retrofit equipment, we

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19489

consider such requests based on the commercial refrigerators and freezers, I. National Technology Transfer and same criteria that we consider in vending machines, non-mechanical heat Advancement Act reviewing all SNAP submissions. transfer equipment, very low temperature refrigeration equipment for This action includes technical VII. Statutory and Executive Order laboratories and room air conditioners standards. EPA has decided to use Reviews that choose to use these refrigerants. standards from UL in the use conditions Additional information about these for the five listed substitutes. EPA is statutes and Executive Orders can be D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act incorporating by reference portions of found at www2.epa.gov/laws- This action does not contain any current editions of the UL Standards regulations/laws-and-executive-orders. unfunded mandate as described in 250, ‘‘Household Refrigerators and A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory UMRA, 2 United States Code (U.S.C.) Freezers’’ (10th Edition, August 25, Planning and Review and Executive 1531–1538, and does not significantly or 2000), 471, ‘‘Commercial Refrigerators Order 13563: Improving Regulation and uniquely affect small governments. This and Freezers’’ (10th Edition, November Regulatory Review action imposes no enforceable duty on 24, 2010), 541 ‘‘Refrigerated Vending any state, local, or tribal governments or Machines’’ (7th Edition, December 30, This action is not a significant the private sector. regulatory action and was therefore not 2011), and 484 ‘‘Room Air submitted to the Office of Management E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Conditioners’’ (8th Edition, August 3, and Budget (OMB) for review. 2012), which include requirements for This action does not have federalism safe use of flammable refrigerants. This B. Paperwork Reduction Act implications. It will not have substantial final rule ensures that these new This action does not impose any new direct effects on the states, on the substitutes for household and information collection burden under the relationship between the national commercial refrigerators and freezers, PRA. OMB has previously approved the government and the states, or on the vending machines, non-mechanical heat distribution of power and information collection activities transfer equipment, very low responsibilities among the various contained in the existing regulations temperature refrigeration equipment, levels of government. and has assigned OMB control number and room air conditioners do not 2060–0226. This final rule contains no F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation present significantly greater risk to new requirements for reporting or and Coordination With Indian Tribal human health or the environment than recordkeeping. Governments other available substitutes. These C. Regulatory Flexibility Act This action does not have tribal standards may be purchased by mail at: COMM 2000; 151 Eastern Avenue; I certify that this action will not have implications, as specified in E.O. 13175. a significant economic impact on a It will not have substantial direct effects Bensenville, IL 60106; Email: orders@ substantial number of small entities on tribal governments, on the comm-2000.com; Telephone: 1–888– under the RFA. In making this relationship between the Federal 853–3503 in the U.S. or Canada (other determination, the impact of concern is government and Indian tribes, or on the countries dial +1–415–352–2168); any significant adverse economic distribution of power and Internet address: http:// impact on small entities. An agency may responsibilities between the Federal ulstandardsinfonet.ul.com/ or certify that a rule will not have a government and Indian tribes. Thus, www.comm-2000.com. significant economic impact on a Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. J. Executive Order 12898: Federal substantial number of small entities if Actions To Address Environmental the rule relieves regulatory burden, has G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Justice in Minority Populations and no net burden or otherwise has a Children From Environmental Health Low-Income Populations positive economic effect on the small and Safety Risks entities subject to the rule. The EPA believes the human health or Today’s action allows equipment This action is not subject to E.O. environmental risk addressed by this 13045 because it is not economically manufacturers the additional options of action will not have potential significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and using ethane, HFC–32, isobutane, disproportionately high and adverse because the environmental health or propane, and R–441A in the specified human health or environmental effects safety risks addressed by this action do end-uses but does not mandate such on minority, low-income or indigenous use. Because refrigeration and AC not present a disproportionate risk to populations because this action equipment for these refrigerants are not children. This action’s health and risk provides human health and manufactured yet in the U.S. for the assessments are contained in Section environmental protection for all affected end-uses (with the exception of limited IV.C of the preamble and in the risk test-marketing), no change in business screens in the docket for this populations without having any practice is required to meet the use rulemaking. disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects conditions, resulting in no adverse H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That impact compared to the absence of this on any population, including any Significantly Affect Energy Supply, minority or low-income population. rule. Provisions that allow venting of Distribution, or Use hydrocarbon refrigerants in the uses This final rule provides refrigerant addressed by this rule reduce regulatory This action is not a ‘‘significant substitutes that have no ODP and lower burden. We have therefore concluded energy action’’ because it is not likely to GWP than other substitutes currently that this action will relieve regulatory have a significant adverse effect on the listed as acceptable. The reduction in burden for all small entities that choose supply, distribution, or use of energy. ODS and GHG emissions assists in to use one of the newly listed Available information indicates that restoring the stratospheric ozone layer hydrocarbon refrigerants. these new systems may be more energy and provides climate benefits. The The use conditions of this rule apply efficient than currently available results of this evaluation are contained to manufacturers of household and systems in some climates. in sections III. and IV. of the preamble.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19490 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) ICF, 2014c. Risk Screen on Substitutes for Sheldon, 1989. Sheldon, L.S., et al. 1989. CFC–12, HCFC–22 and R–502 in Retail Food ‘‘An Investigation of Infiltration and Indoor This action is subject to the CRA, and Refrigeration; Substitute: R–441A Air Quality.’’ New York State Energy the EPA will submit a rule report to ICF, 2014d. Risk Screen on Substitute for Research & Development Authority, Report each House of the Congress and to the CFC–12, CFC–13, R–13B1, and R–503 in Very 90–11. As cited in ICF, 2014h, Risk screen for Comptroller General of the United Low Temperature Refrigeration and Non- propane in household refrigerators and States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ Mechanical Heat Transfer; Substitute: Ethane freezers. as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). (R–170) UL 250. Household Refrigerators and ICF, 2014e. Risk Screen on Substitutes for Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SA: VIII. References CFC–12 and R–502 in Vending Machines; Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers This preamble references the Substitute: R–441A Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the ICF, 2014f. Risk Screen on Substitutes for Refrigerating System. August 2000. following documents, which are also in CFC–12 and R–502 in Vending Machines; the Air Docket at the address listed in UL 471. Commercial Refrigerators and Substitute: Isobutane (R–600a) Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SB: Section I.B.1. Unless specified ICF, 2014g. Risk Screen on Substitutes for Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers otherwise, all documents are available CFC–12 and R–502 in Vending Machines; Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the electronically through the Federal Substitute: Propane (R–290) Refrigerating System. November 2010. Docket Management System, Docket # ICF, 2014h. Risk Screen on Substitutes for UL 484. Room Air Conditioners. 8th EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0748. CFC–12 and HCFC–22 in Household edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Refrigerators and Household Freezers.; Refrigerated Venders Employing a AHRI, 2012. AHRI Guideline N–2012: Substitute: Propane (R–290). Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating Assignment of Refrigerant Container Colors. ICF, 2014i. Risk Screen on Substitutes for System. August 2012. 2012. HCFC–22 in Residential and Light UL 541. Refrigerated Vending Machines. AIRAH, 2013. Flammable Refrigerants— Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat 7th edition. Supplement SA: Requirements Safety Guide. Australian Institute of Pumps; Substitute: Propane (R–290) for Room Air Conditioners Employing a Refrigeration, Air Conditioning and Heating. ICF, 2014j. Risk Screen on Substitutes for 2013. HCFC–22 in Residential and Light Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating ASHRAE, 2010. American National Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat System. December 2011. Standards Institute (ANSI)/American Society Pumps; Substitute: HFC–32 UL 60335–2–40. Safety of Household and of Heating, Refrigerating and Air- (Difluoromethane) Similar Electrical Appliances, Part 2–40: Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). Standard ICF, 2014k. Risk Screen on Substitutes for Particular Requirements for Electrical Heat 34–2010 (supersedes ANSI/ASHRAE HCFC–22 in Residential and Light Pumps, Air-Conditioners and Dehumidifiers. Standard 34–2007): Designation and Safety Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat First Edition. November, 2012. Classification of Refrigerants. 2010. Pumps; Substitute: R–441A World Meteorological Organization A.S. Trust & Holdings, 2012. Significant ICF, 2015a. Potential impacts of (WMO), 2010. Scientific Assessment of New Alternatives Policy Program Submission trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) generated from Ozone Depletion: 2010, Global Ozone to the United States Environmental HFC–32 in room air conditioners. January, Research and Monitoring Project—Report No. Protection Agency for R–441A in retail food 2015. 52, 516 pp., Geneva, Switzerland, 2011. This refrigeration. ICF, 2015b. Potential Impacts of document is accessible at www.wmo.int/ A/S Vestfrost, 2012. Significant New Hydrocarbon Refrigerants during Recycling pages/prog/arep/gaw/ozone_2010/ozone_ Alternatives Policy Program Submission to and Disposal of Appliances. January, 2015. asst_report.html. the United States Environmental Protection IEC 60225–2–40. Safety of Household and List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82 Agency for isobutane in retail food Similar Electrical Appliances, Part 2–40: refrigeration. Particular Requirements for Electrical Heat Environmental protection, Climate Action Plan, 2013. The President’s Pumps, Air-Conditioners and Dehumidifiers. Administrative practice and procedure, Climate Action Plan. Executive Office of the 5th Edition. December, 2013. Air pollution control, Incorporation by President. June, 2013. Available online at Intergovernmental Panel on Climate www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/ Change (IPCC), 2007. Climate Change 2007: reference, Recycling, Reporting and image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf. The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of recordkeeping requirements, Chinese Household Electrical Appliance Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Stratospheric ozone layer. Association (CHEAA), 2013. Significant New Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Dated: February 27, 2015. Alternatives Policy Program Submission to Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Gina McCarthy, the United States Environmental Protection Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, Agency for Propane (R–290) in residential M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge Administrator. and light commercial air conditioning and University Press, Cambridge, United For the reasons stated in the dehumidifiers. Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. This preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is amended as Daikin, 2011. Significant New Alternatives document is accessible at www.ipcc.ch/ follows: Policy Program Submission to the United publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ States Environmental Protection Agency for contents.html PART 82—PROTECTION OF HFC–32 in residential and light commercial Montzka, S.A., 2012. HFCs in the STRATOSPHERIC OZONE air conditioning. Atmosphere: Concentrations, Emissions and EPA, 2007. Guidance on the Use of Models Impacts, ASHRAE/NIST Conference 2012. ■ and Other Analyses for Demonstrating National Oceanic and Atmospheric 1. The authority citation for part 82 Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, Administration (NOAA), 2013. NOAA continues to read as follows: PM2.5, and Regional Haze. U.S. emissions data on HFCs. Available online at Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671– Environmental Protection Agency Office of ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/hats/hfcs/. 7671q. Air Quality Planning and Standards. April Oak Ridge National Lab (ORNL), 1997. J. 2007. Sand, S. Fischer, and V. Baxter, ‘‘Energy and Subpart F—Recycling and Emissions EPA, 2015. Derivation of Charge Limits for Global Warming Impacts of HFC Refrigerants Reduction Room Air Conditioners. Staff memo to Air and Emerging Technologies,’’ 1997, Oak Docket. 2015. Ridge National Lab. ■ 2. Amend § 82.154 by adding ICF, 2014a. Assessment of the Potential Ravishankara et al., 1994. Ravishankara, Impact of Hydrocarbon Refrigerants on A.R., A.A. Turnipseed, N.R. Jensen, S. paragraph (a)(1)(iii) to read as follows: Ground-Level Ozone Concentrations. Barone, M. Mills, C. J. Howard, and S. § 82.154 Prohibitions. ICF, 2014b. Risk Screen on Substitutes for Solomon. Do hydrofluorocarbons destroy CFC–12, HCFC–22 and R–502 in Retail Food stratospheric ozone? Science 263: 71–75. (a)(1) * * * Refrigeration; Substitute: Isobutane (R–600a) 1994. (iii) Effective June 9, 2015:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19491

(A) Isobutane (R–600a) and R–441A in (D) R–441A, propane, and isobutane Subpart G—Significant New retail food refrigerators and freezers in vending machines; and Alternatives Policy Program (stand-alone units only); (E) Propane and R–441A in self- ■ 3. Appendix R to Subpart G is revised (B) Propane (R–290) in household contained room air conditioners for to read as follows: refrigerators, freezers, and combination residential and light commercial air refrigerators and freezers; conditioning and heat pumps. Appendix R to Subpart G of Part 82— (C) Ethane (R–170) in very low * * * * * Substitutes Subject to Use Restrictions temperature refrigeration equipment Listed in the December 20, 2011, final rule, Effective February 21, 2012, and and equipment for non-mechanical heat in the April 10, 2015 Final Rule, transfer; Effective May 11, 2015

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

Household re- Isobutane (R– Acceptable These refrigerants may be used only in new Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 CFR frigerators, 600a). subject to equipment designed specifically and clear- part 1910 must be followed, including freezers, Propane (R– use condi- ly identified for the refrigerant (i.e., none of those at 29 CFR 1910.106 (flammable and and com- 290) tions. these substitutes may be used as a con- combustible liquids), 1910.110 (storage bination re- R–441A version or ‘‘retrofit’’ refrigerant for existing and handling of liquefied petroleum frigerators equipment designed for a different refrig- gases), 1910.157 (portable fire extin- and freezers. erant). guishers), and 1910.1000 (toxic and haz- (New equip- These refrigerants may be used only in a re- ardous substances). ment only) frigerator or freezer, or combination refrig- Proper ventilation should be maintained at all erator and freezer, that meets all require- times during the manufacture and storage ments listed in Supplement SA to the 10th of equipment containing hydrocarbon re- edition of the Underwriters Laboratories frigerants through adherence to good man- (UL) Standard for Household Refrigerators ufacturing practices as per 29 CFR and Freezers, UL 250, dated August 25, 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air 2000. In cases where the final rule in- surrounding the equipment rise above cludes requirements more stringent than one-fourth of the lower flammability limit, those of the 10th edition of UL 250, the the space should be evacuated and re- appliance must meet the requirements of entry should occur only after the space the final rule in place of the requirements has been properly ventilated. in the UL Standard. Technicians and equipment manufacturers The charge size must not exceed 57 g (2.01 should wear appropriate personal protec- oz) in any refrigerator, freezer, or com- tive equipment, including chemical goggles bination refrigerator and freezer in each and protective gloves, when handling circuit. these refrigerants. Special care should be taken to avoid contact with the skin since these refrigerants, like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. A Class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby. Technicians should only use spark-proof tools when working on refrigerators and freezers with these refrigerants. Any recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. Any refrigerant releases should be in a well- ventilated area, such as outside of a building. Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service refrigerators and freezers containing these refrigerants. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19492 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

Household re- Isobutane (R– Acceptable As provided in clauses SA6.1.1 and SA6.1.2 Room occupants should evacuate the space frigerators, 600a). subject to of UL Standard 250, 10th edition, the fol- immediately following the accidental re- freezers, Propane (R– use condi- lowing markings must be attached at the lease of this refrigerant. and com- 290) tions. locations provided and must be perma- If a service port is added then household re- bination re- R–441A nent: frigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerators (a) On or near any evaporators that can be frigerator and freezers using these refrig- and freezers. contacted by the consumer: ‘‘DANGER- erants should have service aperture fit- (New equip- Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Re- tings that differ from fittings used in equipment only) frigerant Used. Do Not Use Mechanical ment or containers using non-flammable Devices To Defrost Refrigerator. Do Not refrigerant. ‘‘Differ’’ means that either the Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’. diameter differs by at least 1/16 inch or (b) Near the machine compartment: ‘‘DAN- the thread direction is reversed (i.e., right- GER—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flam- handed vs. left-handed). These different mable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repaired fittings should be permanently affixed to Only By Trained Service Personnel. Do the unit at the point of service and main- Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’. tained until the end-of-life of the unit, and (c) Near the machine compartment: ‘‘CAU- should not be accessed with an adaptor. TION—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flam- mable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner’s Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Pre- cautions Must Be Followed.’’. (d) On the exterior of the refrigerator: ‘‘CAU- TION—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used.’’. (e) Near any and all exposed refrigerant tubing: ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Puncture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully. Flammable Refrigerant Used.’’. All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high. The refrigerator, freezer, or combination refrigerator and freezer must have red, Pantone® Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, or other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced (typically known as the service port) to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service ports and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) from the compressor and must be replaced if removed.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19493

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

Retail food re- Isobutane (R– Acceptable As provided in clauses SB6.1.2 to SB6.1.5 of Room occupants should evacuate the space frigerators 600a). subject to UL Standard 471, 10th edition, the fol- immediately following the accidental re- and freezers Propane (R– use condi- lowing markings must be attached at the lease of this refrigerant. (stand-alone 290). tions. locations provided and must be perma- If a service port is added then retail food re- units only). R–441A nent: frigerators and freezers using these refrig- (New equip- (a) On or near any evaporators that can be erants should have service aperture fit- ment only) contacted by the consumer: ‘‘DANGER— tings that differ from fittings used in equip- Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Re- ment or containers using non-flammable frigerant Used. Do Not Use Mechanical refrigerant. ‘‘Differ’’ means that either the Devices To Defrost Refrigerator. Do Not diameter differs by at least 1/16 inch or Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’. the thread direction is reversed (i.e., right- (b) Near the machine compartment: ‘‘DAN- handed vs. left-handed). These different GER—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flam- fittings should be permanently affixed to mable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repaired the unit at the point of service and main- Only By Trained Service Personnel. Do tained until the end-of-life of the unit, and Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’. should not be accessed with an adaptor. (c) Near the machine compartment: ‘‘CAU- TION—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flam- mable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner’s Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Pre- cautions Must be Followed.’’. (d) On the exterior of the refrigerator: ‘‘CAU- TION—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used.’’. (e) Near any and all exposed refrigerant tubing: ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Puncture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully. Flammable Refrigerant Used.’’. All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high. The refrigerator or freezer must have red, Pantone® Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, and other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced, typically known as the service port, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service ports and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) from the compressor and must be replaced if removed.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19494 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

Very low tem- Ethane (R– Acceptable This refrigerant may be used only in new Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 CFR perature re- 170). subject to equipment specifically designed and clear- part 1910 must be followed, including frigeration. use condi- ly identified for the refrigerant (i.e., the those at 29 CFR 1910.94 (ventilation) and Non-mechan- tions. substitute may not be used as a conver- 1910.106 (flammable and combustible liq- ical heat sion or ‘‘retrofit’’ refrigerant for existing uids), 1910.110 (storage and handling of transfer equipment designed for other refrigerants). liquefied petroleum gases), 1910.157 (New equip- This refrigerant may only be used in equip- (portable fire extinguishers), and ment only) ment that meets all requirements in Sup- 1910.1000 (toxic and hazardous sub- plement SB to the 10th edition of the Un- stances). derwriters Laboratories (UL) Standard for Proper ventilation should be maintained at all Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers, times during the manufacture and storage UL 471, dated November 24, 2010. In of equipment containing hydrocarbon re- cases where the final rule includes refrigerants through adherence to good man- quirements more stringent than those of ufacturing practices as per 29 CFR the 10th edition of UL 471, the appliance 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air must meet the requirements of the final surrounding the equipment rise above rule in place of the requirements in the UL one-fourth of the lower flammability limit, Standard. the space should be evacuated and re- The charge size for the equipment must not entry should occur only after the space exceed 150 g (5.29 oz) in each circuit. has been properly ventilated. Technicians and equipment manufacturers should wear appropriate personal protective equipment, including chemical goggles and protective gloves, when handling ethane. Special care should be taken to avoid contact with the skin since ethane, like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. A Class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby. Technicians should only use spark-proof tools when working on equipment with flammable refrigerants. Any recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. Any refrigerant releases should be in a well- ventilated area, such as outside of a building. Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service equipment containing ethane. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19495

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

Very low tem- Ethane (R– Acceptable As provided in clauses SB6.1.2 to SB6.1.5 of Room occupants should evacuate the space perature re- 170). subject to UL Standard 471, 10th edition, the fol- immediately following the accidental refrigeration. use condi- lowing markings must be attached at the lease of this refrigerant. Non-mechan- tions. locations provided and must be perma- If a service port is added then refrigeration ical heat nent: equipment using this refrigerant should transfer (a) On or near any evaporators that can be have service aperture fittings that differ (New equip- contacted by the consumer: ‘‘DANGER— from fittings used in equipment or con- ment only) Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Re- tainers using non-flammable refrigerant. frigerant Used. Do Not Use Mechanical ‘‘Differ’’ means that either the diameter dif- Devices To Defrost Refrigerator. Do Not fers by at least 1/16 inch or the thread di- Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’. rection is reversed (i.e., right-handed vs. (b) Near the machine compartment: ‘‘DAN- left-handed). These different fittings should GER—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flam- be permanently affixed to the unit at the mable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repaired point of service and maintained until the Only By Trained Service Personnel. Do end-of-life of the unit, and should not be Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’. accessed with an adaptor. (c) Near the machine compartment: ‘‘CAU- Example of non-mechanical heat transfer TION—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flam- using this refrigerant would be use in a mable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair secondary loop of a thermosiphon. Manual/Owner’s Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Pre- cautions Must be Followed.’’. (d) On the exterior of the refrigerator: ‘‘CAU- TION—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used.’’. (e) Near any and all exposed refrigerant tubing: ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Puncture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully. Flammable Refrigerant Used.’’. All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high. The refrigeration equipment must have red, Pantone® Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, and other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced, typically known as the service port, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service ports and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) from the compressor and must be replaced if removed.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19496 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

Vending Ma- Isobutane (R– Acceptable These refrigerants may be used only in new Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 part chines. 600a). subject to equipment specifically designed and clear- 1910 must be followed, including those at (New equip- Propane (R– use condi- ly identified for the refrigerants (i.e., none 29 CFR 1910.94 (ventilation) and ment only) 290) tions. of these substitutes may be used as a 1910.106 (flammable and combustible liq- R–441A conversion or ‘‘retrofit’’ refrigerant for exist- uids), 1910.110 (storage and handling of ing equipment designed for other refrig- liquefied petroleum gases), 1910.157 erants). (portable fire extinguishers), and Detaching and replacing the old refrigeration 1910.1000 (toxic and hazardous sub- circuit from the outer casing of the equip- stances). ment with a new one containing a new Proper ventilation should be maintained at all evaporator, condenser, and refrigerant tub- times during the manufacture and storage ing within the old casing is considered of equipment containing hydrocarbon re- ‘‘new’’ equipment and not a retrofit of the frigerants through adherence to good man- old, existing equipment. ufacturing practices as per 29 CFR These substitutes may only be used in 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air equipment that meets all requirements in surrounding the equipment rise above Supplement SA to the 7th edition of the one-fourth of the lower flammability limit, Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Standard the space should be evacuated and re- for Refrigerated Vending Machines, UL entry should occur only after the space 541, dated December, 2011. In cases has been properly ventilated. where the final rule includes requirements Technicians and equipment manufacturers more stringent than those of the 7th edi- should wear appropriate personal protection of UL 541, the appliance must meet tive equipment, including chemical goggles the requirements of the final rule in place and protective gloves, when handling of the requirements in the UL Standard. these refrigerants. Special care should be The charge size for vending machines must taken to avoid contact with the skin since not exceed 150 g (5.29 oz) in each circuit. these refrigerants, like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. A Class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby. Technicians should only use spark-proof tools when working on refrigeration equipment with flammable refrigerants. Any recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. Any refrigerant releases should be in a well- ventilated area, such as outside of a building. Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service refrigeration equipment containing these refrigerants. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19497

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

Vending Ma- Isobutane (R– Acceptable As provided in clauses SA6.1.2 to SA6.1.5 of Room occupants should evacuate the space chines. 600a). subject to UL Standard 541, 7th edition, the following immediately following the accidental re- (New equip- Propane (R– use condi- markings must be attached at the loca- lease of this refrigerant. ment only) 290) tions. tions provided and must be permanent: If a service port is added then refrigeration R–441A (a) On or near any evaporators that can be equipment using this refrigerant should contacted by the consumer: ‘‘DANGER— have service aperture fittings that differ Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Re- from fittings used in equipment or con- frigerant Used. Do Not Use Mechanical tainers using non-flammable refrigerant. Devices To Defrost Refrigerator. Do Not ‘‘Differ’’ means that either the diameter dif- Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’. fers by at least 1/16 inch or the thread di- (b) Near the machine compartment: ‘‘DAN- rection is reversed (i.e., right-handed vs. GER—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flam- left-handed). These different fittings should mable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repaired be permanently affixed to the unit at the Only By Trained Service Personnel. Do point of service and maintained until the Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’. end-of-life of the unit, and should not be (c) Near the machine compartment: ‘‘CAU- accessed with an adaptor. TION—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flam- mable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner’s Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Pre- cautions Must be Followed.’’. (d) On the exterior of the refrigerator: ‘‘CAU- TION—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used.’’. (e) Near any and all exposed refrigerant tubing: ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Puncture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully. Flammable Refrigerant Used.’’. All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high. The refrigeration equipment must have red, Pantone® Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, and other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced, typically known as the service port, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service ports and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) from the compressor and must be replaced if removed.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19498 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

Residential HFC–32 ...... Acceptable These refrigerants may be used only in new Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 CFR and light- Propane (R– subject to equipment specifically designed and clear- part 1910 must be followed, including commercial 290) use condi- ly identified for the refrigerants (i.e., none those at 29 CFR 1910.94 (ventilation) and air condi- R–441A tions. of these substitutes may be used as a 1910.106 (flammable and combustible liq- tioning and conversion or ‘‘retrofit’’ refrigerant for exist- uids), 1910.110 (storage and handling of heat ing equipment designed for other refrig- liquefied petroleum gases), 1910.157 pumps— erants) (portable fire extinguishers), and self-con- These refrigerants may only be used in 1910.1000 (toxic and hazardous sub- tained room equipment that meets all requirements in stances). air condi- Supplement SA and Appendices B through Proper ventilation should be maintained at all tioners only. F of the 8th edition of the Underwriters times during the manufacture and storage (New equip- Laboratories (UL) Standard for Room Air of equipment containing hydrocarbon re- ment only) Conditioners, UL 484, dated August 3, frigerants through adherence to good man- 2012. In cases where the final rule in- ufacturing practices as per 29 CFR cludes requirements more stringent than 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air those of the 8th edition of UL 484, the ap- surrounding the equipment rise above pliance must meet the requirements of the one-fourth of the lower flammability limit, final rule in place of the requirements in the space should be evacuated and re- the UL Standard. entry should occur only after the space The charge size for the entire air conditioner has been properly ventilated. must not exceed the maximum refrigerant Technicians and equipment manufacturers mass determined according to Appendix F should wear appropriate personal protec- of UL 484, 8th edition for the room size tive equipment, including chemical goggles where the air conditioner is used. The and protective gloves, when handling charge size for these three refrigerants these refrigerants. Special care should be must in no case exceed 7,960 g (280.8 oz taken to avoid contact with the skin since or 17.55 lb) of HFC–32; 1,000 g (35.3 oz these refrigerants, like many refrigerants, or 2.21 lbs) of propane; or 1,000 g (35.3 can cause freeze burns on the skin. oz or 2.21 lb) of R–441A. For portable air A Class B dry powder type fire extinguisher conditioners, the charge size must in no should be kept nearby. case exceed 2,450 g (80.0 oz or 5.0 lb) of Technicians should only use spark-proof HFC–32; 300 g (10.6 oz or 0.66 lbs) of tools when working on air conditioning propane; or 330 g (11.6 oz or 0.72 lb) of equipment with flammable refrigerants. R–441A. The manufacturer must design a Any recovery equipment used should be de- charge size for the entire air conditioner signed for flammable refrigerants. that does not exceed the amount specified Any refrigerant releases should be in a well- for the unit’s cooling capacity, as specified ventilated area, such as outside of a build- in Table A, B, C, D, or E of this Appendix. ing. Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service refrigeration equipment containing these refrigerants. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19499

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

Residential HFC–32 ...... Acceptable As provided in clauses SA6.1.2 to SA6.1.5 of Room occupants should evacuate the space and light- Propane (R– subject to UL 484, 8th edition, the following markings immediately following the accidental re- commercial 290) use condi- must be attached at the locations provided lease of this refrigerant. air condi- R–441A tions. and must be permanent:. If a service port is added then air conditioning and (a) On the outside of the air conditioner: tioning equipment using this refrigerant heat ‘‘DANGER—Risk of Fire or Explosion. should have service aperture fittings that pumps— Flammable Refrigerant Used. To Be Re- differ from fittings used in equipment or self-con- paired Only By Trained Service Personnel. containers using non-flammable refrig- tained room Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’. erant. ‘‘Differ’’ means that either the di- air condi- (b) On the outside of the air conditioner: ameter differs by at least 1/16 inch or the tioners only. ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire or Explosion. thread direction is reversed (i.e., right- (New equip- Dispose of Properly In Accordance With handed vs. left-handed). These different ment only) Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable fittings should be permanently affixed to Refrigerant Used.’’. the unit at the point of service and main- (c) On the inside of the air conditioner near tained until the end-of-life of the unit, and the compressor: ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire should not be accessed with an adaptor. or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Air conditioning equipment in this category Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner’s includes: Guide Before Attempting To Service This Window air conditioning units. Product. All Safety Precautions Must be Portable room air conditioners. Followed.’’. Packaged terminal air conditioners and heat (d) On the outside of each portable air condi- pumps. tioner: ‘‘WARNING: Appliance hall be installed, operated and stored in a room with a floor area larger the ‘‘X’’ m2 (Y ft2).’’ The value ‘‘X’’ on the label must be determined using the minimum room size in m2 calculated using Appendix F of UL 484, 8th edition. For R–441A, use a lower flammability limit of 0.041 kg/m3 in calculations in Appendix F of UL 484, 8th edition. All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high. The air conditioning equipment must have red, Pantone® Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, and other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced, typically known as the service port, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service ports and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) from the compressor and must be replaced if removed.

NOTE: The use conditions in this appendix contain references to certain standards from Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL). The standards are incorporated by reference, and the referenced sections are made part of the regulations in part 82: 1. UL 250: Household Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System. Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. August 25, 2000. 2. UL 471. Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SB: Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System. Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. November 24, 2010. 3. UL 484. Room Air Conditioners. 8th edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Room Air Conditioners Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System and Appendices B through F. December 21, 2007, with changes through August 3, 2012. 4. UL 541. Refrigerated Vending Machines. 7th edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Refrigerated Venders Employing a Flammable Re- frigerant in the Refrigerating System. December 30, 2011 The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of UL Standards 250, 471, 484 and 541 may be purchased by mail at: COMM 2000; 151 Eastern Avenue; Bensenville, IL 60106; Email: orders@ comm-2000.com; Telephone: 1–888–853–3503 in the U.S. or Canada (other countries dial +1–415–352–2168); Internet address: http://ulstand ardsinfonet.ul.com/ or www.comm-2000.com. You may inspect a copy at U.S. EPA’s Air and Radiation Docket; EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington DC or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For questions regarding access to these standards, the telephone number of EPA’s Air and Radiation Docket is 202–566–1742. For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 19500 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 0.34 0.38 4.65 7.76 0.57 0.63 34,000 34,000 0.33 0.30 4.03 Cooling 6.72 0.50 0.54 30,000 30,000 floor. capacities the 0.32 0.29 3.89 6.49 0.48 0.53 24,000 24,000 Cooling table. above m the floor. 0.29 0.27 3.60 1.0 0.44 6.01 0.49 in and 23,000 23,000 the table. than listed the above in 0.27 0.24 3.29 more 5.48 0.40 0.44 m no 21,000 21,000 0.6 Conditioners listed capacities and Conditioners than Air 0.6 0.22 0.20 2.75 (kg) 0.34 0.37 4.59 (kg) larger 18,000 18,000 Air more (BTU/hr) (BTU/hr) capacities size least and size no at Terminal 2.44 0.20 0.18 larger 4.07 0.30 0.33 smaller charge charge Window 14,000 14,000 capacity Pum12s capacity and next for evaporator evaporator Heat the an an design design Packaged cooling 0.16 smaller 2.21 0.18 cooling 3.68 0.27 0.30 Sizes 12,000 12,000 with with for next between the Terminal pumps pumps Sizes Maximum Charge Maximum 0.17 0.15 2.08 Associated 0.26 0.28 Associated 10,000 10,000 heat heat between or or interpolated Charge Design Packaged units units 1.95 0.16 0.14 3.24 3.47 0.24 0.26 9,000 9,000 linearly Design interpolated be to Maximum 1.80 0.15 0.13 3.00 0.22 0.24 conditioning conditioning are A. 8,000 8,000 linearly air air be table Maximum to Table 1.65 0.13 0.12 the B. 2.74 0.20 0.22 are 7,000 7,000 in table Table those self-contained self-contained 1.27 0.10 0.09 2.12 0.16 0.17 the 6,000 6,000 in with with between use use 1.04 0.08 those 0.08 1.73 0.13 0.14 5,000 5,000 For For capacities between Note: Note: Refrigerant R-290 R-441A Refrigerant R-32 R-290 R-441A R-32

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 ER10AP15.002 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 19501 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 7.96 7.96 2.45 0.30 0.33 34,000 34,000 34,000 those 1.00 1.00 7.96 2.45 0.30 0.33 7.96 0.89 0.98 30,000 30,000 30,000 interpolated between Cooling linearly floor. 1.00 1.00 7.96 2.45 0.30 0.33 0.86 0.95 be 24,000 24,000 the capacities 24,000 table. to the are above in Cooling m 1.00 0.30 0.33 7.96 0.97 2.45 table 7.96 7.96 0.80 0.88 23,000 1.8 23,000 listed 23,000 the floor. in Units than the Units Units AC 7.96 those 2.45 0.30 0.33 0.89 0.98 capacities more AC AC 0.73 0.80 above 21,000 21,000 table. no 21,000 (kg) (kg) (kg) m the larger and 1.8 between Room in Size Size Size and 1.0 0.30 0.33 7.96 0.74 0.82 2.45 0.61 7.96 7.96 than (BTU!hr) (BTU!hr) (BTU!hr) 18,000 18,000 listed 18,000 least smaller capacities Charge Charge Charge more at Wall-Mounted Portable Ceiling-Mounted for capacity capacity capacity next for 0.54 0.59 0.67 for 7.96 2.45 0.30 0.33 0.66 0.73 capacities 14,000 the Cooling Design Design Design 14,000 14,000 evaporator evaporator Sizes Sizes Sizes larger an an 7.96 0.60 0.66 0.30 0.33 2.45 pumps. 6.62 7.32 0.49 0.54 and between Associated Associated Associated 12,000 12,000 12,000 with with Charge heat Charge Maximum Maximum Maximum Charge or smaller table. pumps pumps 7.63 2.45 0.56 0.62 0.30 0.33 6.24 0.46 0.51 the next 10,000 10,000 Design 10,000 Design heat heat Design in the or or conditioners listed linearly interpolated 7.14 0.53 0.58 0.30 0.33 2.45 5.84 0.43 0.47 air 9,000 9,000 9,000 be between Maximum to Maximum Maximum room C. E. conditioners conditioners are 6.61 2.45 0.49 0.54 0.30 0.33 capacities 5.41 0.40 0.44 D. 8,000 8,000 8,000 air air table Table Table larger portable interpolated Table the 0.40 4.94 and in 7,000 7,000 7,000 0.44 6.03 0.49 0.30 0.33 linearly those self-contained self-contained non-fixed be smaller 0.28 0.36 0.31 6,000 6,000 6,000 4.67 2.35 2.45 0.34 0.38 0.29 0.31 to with with with next are between use use use the 1.56 0.28 3.82 0.31 0.19 0.21 0.23 0.25 3.12 3.82 5,000 5,000 5,000 table For For For the in capacities Note: Note: Note: between Refrigerant Refrigerant Refrigerant R-32 R-290 R-441A R-32 R-290 R-441A R-32 R-290 R-441A

[FR Doc. 2015–07895 Filed 4–9–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–C

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:43 Apr 09, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\10APR2.SGM 10APR2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2 ER10AP15.003